In Search of a pedagogy of personal voicein jazz improvisation

Improvising a reflective – responsive model

Judy LewisDecember 2011

maggie and milly and molly and maywent down to the beach (to play one day)

and maggie discovered a shell that sangso sweetly she couldn't remember her troubles, and

milly befriended a stranded starwhose rays five languid fingers were;

and molly was chased by a horrible thingwhich raced sideways while blowing bubbles; and

may came home with a smooth round stoneas small as the world and as large as alone.

For whatever we lose (like a you or a me)it's always ourselves we find in the sea

e.e.cummings95 poems

Special thanks to Dr. Veronika CohenThanks to Dr. Steven Hornstein

Table of Contents

1. Acknowledgements

ii

2. Table of Contents

iii

2. Prologue

3. Review of Literature

▪ The Nature of Improvisation

▪ Methodologies for Improvisation Instructions

▪ Methodologies Specific to Jazz Improvisation

▪ Critique of Standard Jazz Improvisation Methodologies

▪ Research in Personal Voice

4. Rationale: Toward a Philosophy & Pedagogy of Personal Voice

5. Method

6. Guy – The Process ▪ Starting Point ▪ Explorations in Fourths ▪ I Would've Called Her Sam : The Melody in the Octave▪ Twins : Putting Pieces Together ▪ The Message; Everybody's Song But My Own; Driftin' : Learning to Swing ▪ Mindiatyr : The Ultimate Challenge

7. Salome – The Process ▪ Starting Point ▪ I Would've Called Her Sam : The Melody in the Octave▪ Exploration in Fourths ▪ In Dulce Jubilo: Organic Unity – part I: Song & Solo ▪ Twins : Organic Unity – part II: Disparate Sections ▪ The Message; Driftin' : Learning to Swing

8. The G-Song

▪ Introduction ▪ Guy ▪ Salome

9. Discussion

10. The Use of Original Compositions as Referents▪ Guy▪ Salome

11. Conclusions

12. References

13. Appendices

I: Repertoire Transcriptions & AnalysisII: G Song Transcriptions and AnalysisIII: Initial Student QuestionnairesIV: Repertoire charts & TranscriptionsV: Original Compositions chartsVI: Complete List of Repertoire

Prologue

In a typical Jazz program in university today, students begin their study of improvisation with what is commonly referred to as building a jazz vocabulary (Berliner, 1994). They learn standard chord-scale systems, are taught to recognize the right notes from the wrong notes; they study the great improvisers of past generations - icons of the Jazz legacy - listening to and performing their works, analyzing and assimilating their theoretical systems. An expressly accepted consensus is that the development of one's own style comes only after learning and incorporating these important historical contributions, after rooting oneself in the tradition, after paying one's dues (Berliner, 1994).

And yet each year the professional Jazz establishment bemoans the lack of fresh new voices arriving on the scene (Nicholson, 2007). World renown jazz pianist, Keith Jarrett asked, in an interview with The New York Times "Every year fewer and fewer musicians let us know who they are by the expression of music. Where is that voice, that original voice? "1 1 Jarrett, Keith. "Letters." The New York Times, June 11, 2000.

This case study follows the development of two classically trained pianists on their journey to becoming improvising Jazz musicians. Both were highly qualified pianists with an advanced level of technical proficiency, knowledge of functional harmony, and ear-training skills. Both had no previous experience in improvising and actually expressed a fear of the task. The goal of my work with these students was to shed new light on the roots of improvisational ability and the contextual and pedagogical influences essential in the development of a personal improvisational voice. In addition, I hoped to create a path that other educators might find useful in their own work in guiding students toward developing a personal voice in Jazz.

The essential question behind this research was, what would happen if I were to start with the student's unique sensibilities instead of ending with them? What if, instead of taking the stance of the teacher, I became an improviser myself – listening and responding in the moment to what I heard?

Translated into a more academic language – Is it beneficial to development of a personal voice to begin with student-directed exploration and only afterward study the jazz styles of others? Is a methodology of teaching appropriate for improvisational studies? But these questions - though hopefully they will receive answers in this paper - only touch the surface of what I suspected was waiting to be discovered. As this study progressed over the course of a year and a half, it became clear that what I was, in fact, witnessing and uncovering was the intimate improvisational dialogue which takes place between student and mentor, beginner and veteran, explorer and observer, and how that dialogue either encourages artistic self discovery or stifles it. What I also discovered, was that these dual roles are constantly shifting and the self discovery was as much my own as it was my students'.

In addition, a number of refreshing and somewhat unexpected discoveries took place. It became apparent, as each of these students tackled the challenges of becoming an improviser, that we were chiefly involved in a process of building and developing artistic habits, habits that I believe are the core of personal improvisational expression, e.g. the ability to listen on the deepest level both to one's inner voice and to what one is playing; the courage to play and explore; a constitution of 'divergent hearing' and openness to discovery of new possibilities; and the art of self assessment and reflection.

This paper does not propose a radical revamping of the established Jazz department at the university level, though it will attempt to bring to the fore a number of questions for further research relating to an extended jazz curriculum. It is my hope that this study will contribute to a reevaluation of private lesson instruction in improvisation which every jazz student receives.

Rereading Keith Jarrett's exasperated statement quoted above, I would suggest that at the end of the day we must ask ourselves - do we, as teachers, possess the ability to help uncover something of the artist and his/her "original voice" in every student we teach? It is my hope that this paper will be one step in answering that question.

~~~

Review of the Literature

Initial academic research regarding improvisation appears as early as 1920 (Coleman) with several studies being published by Moorhead and Pond in the 1940's. All of these researchers focused on improvisation as exhibited in young children and the natural instincts that children have for spontaneous music making. The first widespread academic interest, however, came in the 1970's. Most likely the two key factors for this interest were (1) the beginning of the development of jazz departments in university music schools and, (2) The Music Educators National Conference's (MENC) publishing of the School Music Program: Description & Standards in 1974, which called for improvisation as part of the public school curriculum.

An important study, in the field of children’s improvisation, was conducted by Veronika Cohen (1980). Using the work of Pond as a point of departure, Cohen observed children in a kindergarten setting interacting in an area called the ‘music center’. Over the course of three years, Cohen interacted with the children and videotaped individual and group improvisational initiatives, documenting how the children explored musical instruments, musical elements, and relationships between sounds; how they practiced toward mastery of self defined tasks; and how they produced what Cohen called musical gestures. Cohen’s assessments and conclusions were significant in deepening an understanding of children’s improvisational processes, particularly in her documentation of the kinesthetic element existent in musical improvisation and the similarity between musical schemata evident in children’s musical gestures and contemporary theories of adult music-making.

Since the mid-90's there has been a renewed interest in improvisation research stimulated, in part, by the publication of the 1994 National Standards for Arts Education by the Consortium of National Arts Education Associations which again called for incorporating musical improvisation in the classroom, giving descriptions and sample activities. At the same time, MENC published the National Standards Assessment giving sample strategies and benchmarks for accessing progress in each of the content standards.

For the purposes of this study, there are several areas in the literature, which need to be investigated if an attempt to design an optimal approach to teaching jazz improvisation, with an emphasis on a personal voice, is to be undertaken. These include: What is the nature of improvisation? How is improvisation, at present, taught? How is improvisation evaluated and how do existing evaluation methods influence the methodology of improvisational studies?

Some might immediately raise the issue that the above questions might be answered differently in the general field of improvisation and in the specific field of jazz improvisation. This is highly likely and it is the comparison of the various areas, I believe, which is crucial to discovering a possible baseline consensus and which will then allow this study to ask the question – Can jazz improvisation pedagogy be rethought to encourage development of a personal voice?

The nature of improvisation

Surely how one perceives the nature of the activity of improvising will inform any suggested methodologies and, whether overtly or not, presently accepted methodologies of improvisational

instruction have at their core some underlying belief as to the nature of the act. The problem begins when it becomes apparent that the number of varied angles from which attempts have been made to answer this question are numerous, often at odds with one another.

As mentioned above, the first research into improvisation focused on it's appearance in children's play. There are subsequent researchers who view the essence of advanced improvisation to be play – similar to the child's process of "exploring the materials of the world in order to master unwritten and unspoken rules controlling that world" (Nachmanovitch, 2006). Others suggest that the "energy and attitude" of children at play, the child's tendency to become a bricoleur – to take given materials and create something completely new - is the origin of the musician's impulse to improvise (Soules, 2004). And the ability to assume this childlike state of freeplay, a reality in which the act is its own destination and the focus is on process rather than product, is crucial to the authenticity of expression in musical improvisation (Nachmanovitch,1990; Koops & Taggart, 2011). Hall (1992) suggests that musical improvisation is more closely allied to acquired abilities which, though reinforced by culture, are automatic rather than learned and suggests that certain cultural influences might actually repress a natural inclination toward improvisation by turning what should be an inside-out orientation into an outside-in one (Hall, 1992).

There are those who attempt to understand the phenomenon of improvisation according to the cognitive sciences and psychology. Focus is on cognitive functioning and the unique inner-directed temporal conception present during improvisation, a conception that is key to spontaneity, and which distinguishes improvisation from composition (Sarath,2002). Because the future in improvisation is un-manifest, awareness is more intensely directed toward the present as the last manifest

point in the creative process. The fact that the past is unchangeable within a continuous stream of ideas also magnifies the moment at hand as the locus of attention (Sarath, 1996). Pressing (1987) has developed a theory of improvisation based on physiology and neuropsychology. The general premise is that the process of improvisation is a stringing together of a series of multi-aspect 'event clusters' during each of which a continuation is chosen, based upon either the continuing of some existing stream of musical development, or the interruption of that stream. The fundamental nature of improvisation, then, is one of decision-making, continually accounting for a referent and the localized situation and drawing upon long and short-term memory (Pressing, 1987). Others posit that the improviser continually unites focus on the moment with a backward orientation - implications of musical events that have already taken place - and a forward orientation in terms of qualities that can be developed onwards in the course of the improvisation (Gustavsen, 1999).

Some choose to define improvisation in the general context of musical skills to be learned and taught (Kratus, 1991; Azarra, 2002). The ability to improvise means that an individual has internalized a musical vocabulary and is able to use that vocabulary to express musical ideas spontaneously. The acquired musical vocabulary becomes the improvisers internal source for meaningful expression (Azarra, 2002). The consensus is that the improviser reuses and reworks material from previous performances as he continually draws on this inner vocabulary. Memory is used to recall the details of the style in which the improviser is performing and to recall musical events, patterns, and sound combinations that have become part of the improviser's internal source of musical ideas (Tirro,1974). Finally, there are those who relate to improvisation as an existential issue, a matter of philosophy, often bordering on the mystical. Improvisation is the ability of the musician

to tap into the interbeing of inherent existence, drawing on deep wellsprings of universal culture. (Nachmanovitch, 2006). It is the free play of consciousness as it draws, paints, and plays the raw material emerging from the unconscious (Nachmanovitch,1990). In the improvisational act the process itself is the work of art, an unfolding if you will, guided by a problem-finding orientation (Sawyer, 2000). The notions of transcendence, self-transformation, and ritual space are mentioned frequently in describing the essence of improvisation by researchers of this school (Allsup, 1997; Sarath, 2002; Smith, 1998; Werner,1996). The act of playing music – improvising – and the concept of ritual meet in their necessity for a sacred space, a temporarily real world of their own, a space in which play detaches itself from everyday surroundings and a unique set of rules pertain (Huizinga, 1949). A fundamental relationship exists between improviser and improvisation, enjoined in a process of infinite becoming as the artist creates the music and the music creates the artist (Peters, 2009). The act of improvisation is seen as engaging the musician's personality, desires, limits, obstacles and fears requiring an ability to negotiate dilemmas and resolve intimate conflicts as in the closest of personal relations (Gustavsen, 1999). Others suggest that the improviser surrenders control to a higher force, taming the mind, letting go of the ego, and playing only what wants to come out, and by virtue of these acts becomes aware of another space (Werner, 1996). Exemplary improvisation has been discussed in light of Emerson's notion of self-trust and Cavell's moral perfectionism, a perfectionism achieved by virtue of a commitment to speak and act true to oneself, (Day, 2000).

Methodologies for improvisation instruction

As mentioned above, there are as many methodologies and theories for teaching improvisation as there are understandings of the

nature of improvisation. Methodologies differ in their closeness to one side or the other of several dichotomies: teacher-directed/ student-directed; free /stylistic; aural/theoretical and imagery/theoretical.

There are researchers who challenge the belief that improvisation is a skill that can be taught, proposing that true improvisation is a disposition to be enabled and nurtured and that current methods being used do not encourage or facilitate true creative thinking and growth (Hickey, 2009). Given that a fundamental purpose of engaging in performing art forms is to provoke some sort of personal transformation, it follows that improvisational instruction that is prescribed, though the most common method, is inauthentic (Allsup,1997). The model of a teacher-directed methodology in improvisational studies, needs to be replaced with a learner-directed approach that develops an improvisatory disposition, allowing students to discover themselves by building on their already existing knowledge and only later moving toward specific skills needed for genre specific improvisation. (Hickey, 2009; Watson, 2010). In the student-directed model, the role of the teacher is to act in ways that advance the student's thinking and creative voice, not to teach students to play as the teacher does but rather to create a context in which the student feels free and safe to explore and discover his own music (Hickey, 2009; Nachmanovitch, 2006).

Gustavsen proposes that perhaps the key element to be learned in improvisational studies is the ability to listen. An improviser needs to be able to grasp any musical situation in terms of its harmonic, melodic, textural, rhythmic and periodic implications, and to be able to process this information in a flow that allows for flexibility and synthesis. He must develop an ability to listen for the emergent qualities in phrases or musical events while they are still in the making. To do this he must have a highly developed aural sense and focus as well as the ability to be continually self-reflective

(Gustavsen, 1999). These abilities can be developed under the guidance of a sensitive mentor.

The research that presents methodologies for improvisation varies in both the degree of structure and the developmental sequence. Perhaps the most comprehensive approach to improvisation pedagogy to date was designed by Kratus (1995), an approach which links early, musically intuitive behaviors with mature, musically sophisticated ones. According to Kratus, in order to progress from novice to expert, the student needs to develop the following skills: ability to audiate one's musical ideas, physical technical ability to execute those ideas, a focus on musical product as opposed to process, a repertoire of developmental strategies for shaping improvisations over time, and a repertoire of specific stylistic conventions for improvising in a given style. To achieve these goals, Kratus identified seven levels of improvisational ability and asserts that teacher awareness and recognition of these levels and subsequent teacher-provided guidance from one level to the next, constitutes an optimal approach to teaching improvisation.

Kratus's first level of improvisation is exploration, characterized by seemingly random sounds and having little structure. According to Kratus, exploration lacks purposefulness and structural constraints and is the most common mode of improvisation in young children.

In the second level, process-oriented improvisation, the student begins to control the music created in a rudimentary way, so that it begins to match his intentions. For Kratus, this is the level at which true improvisation begins. The noticeable feature of this level is that of repeated patterns indicating that the student has audiated a pattern by holding it in short-term memory, developed intentions about performing it again, and controlled the performance medium well enough to produce the intended effect. The teacher, at this stage, is instructed to help the student recognize his used patterns and begin to relate them to a macro-structural approach.

Two things happen which enable a shift from a process-orientated improvisation to the product-orientation of level III: (1) the student becomes aware of external musical standards and styles and begins to structure his own improvisations to be more like the music he hears; (2) the student becomes aware that music can be a meaningful expression shared with others and expands his focus to include the concept of audience. Students' improvisations, at this stage, begin to show the use of a consistent tonality or meter, the use of a steady beat, the use of phrases, or references to other musical pieces or stylistic traits. Kratus instructs the teacher to introduce the student to various structural dimensions of music - different meters, tempos, chord changes and tonalities - characteristics which impose certain constraints on the improviser’s decisions and can provide the necessary syntactic structure to encourage product-oriented improvisation to take place.

In Kratus's level IV, fluid improvisation, the student's aural skills continue to improve enabling the student to improvise in response to more sophisticated changes in the musical context. At this level, to help the student perform more fluidly, he should be given opportunities to solo in a variety of meters, tempos, chord changes and tonalities. Kratus notes that fluid improvisation is likely to sound technically correct yet inexpressive and mechanical. The teacher must now turn the student's attention to structuring his improvisations into musically satisfying wholes, which leads to the next level.

In structural improvisation, level V, the student is able to use a variety of strategies for shaping the overall structure of an improvisation, which may include ways of developing musical ideas in improvisation, creating musical interest through tension and release, and providing flow from one musical idea to the next. The teacher’s role at this level is to introduce the student to different musical and non-musical means for connecting musical ideas and structuring an improvisation. It is at this level that Kratus suggests

analysis of performances by other musicians as models of structural organization.

The student’s improvisation at this level are technically well played and musically well structured. What still separates the student from the expert, according to Kratus, is an understanding and application of stylistic nuances. To achieve the next level, stylistic improvisation, the student must turn his attention to the specific traditions of a given style.

At the sixth level of improvisation - stylistic improvisation - the student learns to perform particular styles. According to Kratus, this begins as observation and imitation of stylistic models as the student develops a performance repertoire of the specific rhythms, melodic patterns, harmonic characteristics and timbral qualities in the given style, including clichés or ’tricks of the trade’ that experts in the style use frequently. The student learns a repertoire of melodies that are commonly used as a basis for improvisation and analyzes and imitates expert performances pieces from the repertoire.

Though Kratus encourages the teacher, in this level, to encourage the student to "find a personal voice within the style", he does not give any guidance as to how this might be accomplished. And in fact, regarding his final level - personal improvisation - Kratus writes, "Occasionally an expert musician will push the boundaries of a style so far that the initial style is no longer recognizable and a new style emerges. The new style establishes its own conventions that enable others to perform and listen to the music with meaning. Musicians who can break new ground in their improvising have reached the seventh level of improvisation, called personal improvisation. Very few musicians attain this level."

Kratus notes that students cannot skip levels, but they may revert to earlier levels, or the teacher may choose to revert to an earlier level when introducing a new element or aspect.

Another methodology for teaching improvisation was constructed by Sarath (2002) in which he proposes a balance between curriculum driven studies and student-directed choice of direction with the final goal being defined as creative awareness. Sarath defines three levels of improvisational studies from 'surface' to 'foundation'. In each of the 3 levels two complimentary forces are explored: structures and processes. Structures are established norms and craft elements gained through repetition, emulation, transcription, and even rote learning. As Sarath writes, "There is nothing anti-creative about these learning modalities. In fact, they are essential for assimilation of certain kinds of skills. The problem is when structural emphasis dominates at the expense of processual study." Processes are the fluid, inventive, excursions of the student as he plays with and assimilates the structural materials he has learned.

In the first level, creative awareness level III – basic musical elements, the student is exposed to harmony, melody, rhythm, density, dynamics, silence, and texture. This is balanced with what Sarath calls trans-stylistic improvisation where the "student draws freely from the complete range of style influences they have assimilated and consequently fashion their own" (Sarath, 2002).

In creative awareness Level II - extra-musical influences, the student is asked to draw on the "totality of influences assimilated from one's life including feelings, relationships, studies, dreams, travels, etc. What makes each individual unique" (Sarath, 2002). This is again balanced with trans-stylistic improvisation and also meditation. In creative awareness Level I - transcendence, structure and process unite.

The discussion of aural vs. theoretical methodologies for teaching improvisation revolves around whether the ideal way to transmit the musical building blocks of improvisation is through textual study of theoretical materials or whether those materials should be assimilated aurally. It is important to note that the materials are,

by and large, the same materials. What differs is the mode of transmission. I would therefore categorize these methods as teacher-directed. It is also important, I believe, to draw a distinction between an aural approach to learning improvisation and Gordon's concept of audiation. (This distinction will be central to my own approach which will be discussed further on.) Gordon himself comments that, "most of the music instruction received in elementary school, in high school, and at the college and university levels emphasized imitation and recognition at the expense of audiation" (Gordon, 1989). Audiation is the ability to hear the music before we play it and Gordon claims that "unless one can audiate what he is going to create and improvise before he performs it…all that may be heard at best are the mechanics of scales and arpeggios, and at worst, mere exploration" (Gordon, 1989). Gordon does not, however, appear to be opposed to the aural learning of patterns and stylistic formulae as suggested in his statement, "The more tonal patterns and rhythm patterns that you can audiate in different tonalities and meters the more meaning that you can bring to the music that you are hearing in audiation" (Gordon, 1989).

Azzara proposes a methodology based primarily on aural acquisition of skills. He suggests that students learn to play tunes by ear in many keys, learn to sing and play the basslines of tunes by ear to develop an understanding of harmonic progressions, chant rhythm patterns to define meter and provide a basis for understanding rhythms and meter, sing tonal patterns that outline the function of the harmony to develop aural skills, aurally embellish melodies and their harmonic parts, countermelodies, chord tones, and bass lines, and learn improvised solos by ear (Azzara, 1999).

The specific aural vs. theoretical debate has received considerable attention in jazz improvisation literature as well. Some researchers view the theoretical approach as placing the cart of music theory before the horse of musical experience (Borgo, 2007). According to

this view, one’s ability to hear and therefore use any theoretical construct (e.g., specific scales, chords, rhythms, intervals, etc.) will always depend on the individual student's perceptual capacities and experiences. The teacher cannot presume that simply knowing about aspects of music theory will in any way assist students in becoming better improvisers.

Watson calculated the effects of an aural vs. theoretical approach to teaching jazz improvisation in his 2010 study of 62 non-jazz university music students. The students were divided into two groups, a group that received instruction primarily through aural imitation procedures and a group that received instruction primarily through notated exercises and transcriptions. Both instructional groups performed identical rhythm and melodic patterns, tonal patterns, and expressive device exercises, and they were exposed to identical model improvisations, with the only difference between the groups being the mode of instruction. Treatment materials included (a) short rhythmic and melodic patterns to develop facility with syncopation, accent, and articulation; (b) melodic development exercises that addressed the use of sequences, theme and variations, and the application of patterns to a chord progression; (c) exercises to help develop the ability to use expressive tonal manipulations such as scoops, fall-offs, and flips; (d) pacing exercises; (e) exemplary model improvisations. Each group received approximately 3 1/2 hours of instruction and students were then asked to record an improvisation for the jazz tune Perdido.

Results from the study supported the importance of an aural approach to jazz improvisation studies and suggests that educators consider the incorporation of aural imitation tasks and exposure to exemplary models into their improvisation teaching methodologies. Based on the findings, Watson suggests that those teachers whose approaches rely more heavily on reading notated exercises may wish to reevaluate their methods.

Huovinen, Tenkanen and Kuusinen conducted a case study comparing the above theoretical approach to what they refer to as a dramaturgical approach. The ‘dramaturgical approach' relies less on concepts of music theory and more on holistic images, broader ‘architectonic’ features of improvisations and ideas of subjective expression. Instead of an exclusive concern with musical building blocks expressed in the language of music theory, attention is paid to what is expressed by using these means – how various types of dramatic successions or developments are constructed, how tensions are created or resolved, and how non-musical imagery may be applied (Huovinen, Tenkanen & Kuusinen, 2010).

The study included 26 classical music students at a university music academy. The students were divided into two groups – the dramaturgical group and the theoretical group – and each student was given five 20-minute private lessons in the course of one week. Instruction for the theoretical group was based on the commonly used chord-scale approach2 and used standard music theory concepts like scale, arpeggio, chord, chromatics, etc. The second group's instruction was ‘dramaturgical’ in nature, focusing on concepts such as balance, repetition & variation, tension, melody & phrase, arch, etc. All improvisation exercises in both groups were based on the same simple 8 bar harmonic progression. Recorded improvisations from the first and last lessons were analyzed.

One difference that was noted in the results was a more significant development of rhythm in the dramaturgical group exhibited by greater rhythmic variety in their improvisations, possibly because they needed to pay less attention to theoretical rules and instructions so were freer to explore other musical dimensions. On the other hand, the music-theoretically group gained more independence from the chord changes during the course. The researchers noted that these results may reflect the fact that the participants in the theoretical group – given their possibility of

2 In chord-scale theory, developed by George Russell, each chord in a composition has a related scale, which can be used as a vehicle for improvised melodies.

inspecting the chord changes on paper and their explicitly music-theoretical instructions – could faster develop an ability to play at will somewhat against the given chords, whereas the dramaturgical group was, at the

end of the course, still striving to play according to them (Huovinen, Tenkanen & Kuusinen, 2010). In general, the evaluators concluded the dramaturgical group demonstrated greater change – perhaps by learning to use more personalized features as part of the improvised melodies. For these players, then, the first stages in learning musical improvisation were dominated not by a move towards the conventional, but rather by learning to fashion their improvisations in a more personal manner (Huovinen, Tenkanen & Kuusinen, 2010). The researchers concluded that concentrating solely on theoretical materials may easily lead the students to focus primarily on pitch organization - more involved in what they are playing than how they are playing.

Another focus, related to the one described in the previous study, involves extensive use of metaphor. Gustavsen writes, "Instead of trying to deny this (use of metaphors in instruction) in the way we develop our technical terms and analytical perspectives, we should focus on maximizing the benefits of metaphoric language" (Gustavsen, 1999). He advocates a multiplicity of metaphors beyond the most common one of 'improvisation as telling a story'. Other metaphors he suggests include the polarities of: movement vs. duration; gratification vs. frustration; stimulation vs. stabilization; closeness vs. distance; and difference vs. sameness. (Gustavsen, 1999).

Methodologies specific to jazz improvisation

It is impossible to begin a review of the research regarding jazz improvisation methods without first briefly discussing the mass-market phenomenon of how-to books that have swamped the field (both in the academy and out) since the 1960's. With everything from comprehensive, multi-volume methodologies by educators such as David Baker and Mark Levine, to hundreds of single volumes – How to Improvise Blues Lick, Coltrane's Patterns, Jazz Improvising Made Easy – (for example), to Jamey Aebersold's massive library of jazz playbacks that allow the budding student to 'play along' with a real band on thousands of jazz standards, the big business of jazz improvisation has successfully analyzed, quantized, and systematized the art of jazz improvisation. The marketing image presented is that, with the right book, and practice, just about anyone can learn to improvise jazz.

In the field of jazz improvisation, the self-help market of the '60's received a boost in the '70's and '80's as jazz departments popped up worldwide in university music programs using methodologies that often complemented these books. Many teachers and teacher/performers in these programs have written and published their own self-help books for jazz improvisation as an aid to their own students and other interested musicians.

The style of jazz taught in the majority of university programs is derived from the conventions of the bebop and hard bop styles of the 1940's and '50's. The need to justify jazz education as worthy of institutional and cultural attention led to a clear, if in retrospect slightly limited, definition of a single jazz style and related skills. Some claim that effectively, the price exacted from jazz in exchange for entering academia was that for it to be taught, it had to be defined (Nicholson, 2005; Nisenson, 2000).

There are two main pedagogical approaches most common in the teaching of jazz improvisation, often being used in tandem: theoretically-based approaches, and practice-based approaches. In theoretically based approaches musical material is presented as it

relates to harmonic and structural components of the repertory. Harmonic analysis and the application of the chord-scale system are perhaps the most frequently observed examples of such an orientation. In a practice-based methodology, materials are derived from existing musical sources - recorded and/or transcribed solos - and are intended to be learned, analyzed and applied to improvisational performance. These musical sources provide the student with a vocabulary of improvisational ideas including the use of patterns, clichés, and licks that they might then apply to performance situations (Prouty,2004 ). Young musicians learn to speak jazz by imitating seasoned improvisers through their recorded improvisations, acquiring a complex vocabulary of conventional phrases and phrase components, which they may then draw upon in formulating a jazz solo. Discovering that certain, apparently different phrases gleaned from disparate solos share a similar basis is a familiar revelation for students and encourages subsequent efforts to identify and catalogue common jazz components and their variants (Berliner, 1994). Students are encouraged not only to learn by rote the musical ideas and patterns of jazz icons but to structure their own patterns in imitation of the originals. Proponents of these approaches note, as rationale, that evidence of formula playing can be found in the greatest of jazz improvisers. This methodology is seen to afford the student not only scales which fit various chords, but also a series of melodic formulas which can be plugged into appropriate spots in the chord progression (Potter, 1990). The common ground of these two methods is (1) the goal of assimilating a system of correct note choices to be used over standard chord progressions and, (2) they are both problem-solving methodologies that are teacher-directed.

In order to construct a more comprehensive understanding of common jazz improvisation methodology it might be useful to ask the question: How are students evaluated to see if they have achieved the goals of a standard jazz program?

Several studies have been done in an attempt to create comprehensive evaluation scales for jazz improvisation on a college level. Rose (1985) proposed the following general criteria for jazz improvisation evaluation: transition from and back to the melody; use of scales, modes and non-harmonic tones; response to fellow musicians; expressiveness as demonstrated in the use of dynamics, phrasing, articulation, tone, and tension and release; continuity of musical ideas; technical skill; accuracy; and exploration.

Madura sampled 102 university jazz vocalist improvising on a blues piece, rhythm changes, and Gershwin's Summertime as well as one free improvisation. The improvisations were then evaluated with her own 1996 scale (with several additional criteria) which included (a) rhythmic feel and scat syllables; (b) tonal - intonation, correct notes, and vocal timbre; and (c) expressive/creative variety of timbre, range, and dynamics. The 6 new items were the use of sophisticated harmonic techniques, variety and originality of scat syllables, vocal control, emotional substance, and originality of vocal timbre. The free improvisation task was assessed only on creativity criteria (all variety, originality, development and syntax items from the jazz measure), fluency, and emotional substance (Madura, 2008).

Derek Smith ventured to construct and validate a rating scale for collegiate wind jazz improvisation performance. In the course of the study, a 14-item Wind Jazz Improvisation Evaluation Scale (WJIES) was constructed and refined through a multi-rational approach, calling upon the input of educators, professional performers as well as current pedagogical materials (Smith, 2009). The final scale included the following 14 items grouped into the categories of performance skills and creative development: performance skills: demonstrates a knowledge of jazz theory; uses melodic motifs and/or sequences; plays with confidence; plays with appropriate jazz time feel and/or rhythm; plays with good technical facility; plays with good intonation; development of solo is logical; creative development: plays with characteristic tone quality;

expresses ideas with certainty; performs with emotional expression; plays with appropriate jazz style; performance exhibits imagination and/or creativity; interacts and dialogues with accompaniment; effectively uses chromatic approach tones. (*Note: specific items in the actual scale were phrased negatively so as to avoid acquiescence bias.)

Another scale for evaluating jazz improvisation, the Jazz Improvisation Performance Achievement Measure was developed by Watson (2010) and contains the following 24 items divided into 4 categories and measured with a 7-point Likert scale:Rhythm - sense of time, use of stylistically appropriate 8th-note feel, use of rhythmic patterns appropriate to style, Variety of rhythmic density, use of rhythmic displacement, use of related or repeated rhythmic ideas ,use of rhythmic motive developmentMelody - use of melodic motive development, use of melodic sequences,use of appropriate clichés or patterns, use of pitch patterns appropriate to style, development of logical phrases ,effective use of space, use of related or repeated melodic ideas.Harmony - awareness of harmonic form, resolution of melody notes,voice leading across chord changes, recovery from harmonic errors,effective use of non-harmonic tones.Style/Expression - use of appropriate jazz articulations, development of intensity throughout solo, use of full range of instrument, use of expressive devices such as smears, bends, scoops, fall-offs, communication of emotional expression.

The IJIEM was developed by May (2003) who surveyed 85 wind players enrolled in university jazz programs. The criteria included: technical facility, rhythmic/time feel, melodic and rhythmic development, style, harmony, expression, and creativity. Each of the seven main categories was explained by a short phrase defining the parameters of the item.

McPherson (1993) suggested a broader evaluative standard in his study of 101 high school jazz players. He used the following 7-item scale, arranged in 3 categories, for evaluation of similar stylistically conceived improvisation: Instrumental fluency – (1) technical skill, (2) musical expression, (3) musical fluency (including spontaneity and ease of movement between ideas); Creativity – (4) musical flexibility (including manipulation of musical parameters and elaboration of musical stimulus), (5) musical originality (including uniqueness), and (6) musical syntax (including ability to adapt to style and to complement a set criteria); and finally, musical quality (including overall musical appeal).

Though each evaluation scale gives attention to the more creative aspects of improvisation (to a greater or lesser degree), a quick glance at the overlapping criteria indicates, I believe, a noticeable bias in the direction of stylistic techniques and skills. This is to be expected as a clear task of any academic methodology is the ability to quantitatively measure its own efficiency by virtue of the students' progress. On the one hand, creativity-oriented items run the risk of entering the realm of subjectivity. However, exaggerated attention to conventional stylistic items runs the risk of promoting conformity over musical vision and this issue is compounded by the fact that in all of the above mentioned studies the referents (piece being improvised on) were in traditional jazz styles (blues, swing, and bebop), styles that bring with them defined sets of interpretational rules. Another considerable problem with this situation is a sort of catch-22 effect as evaluation criteria are forced to reflect quantifiable teaching materials and, in return, teaching materials and methodologies are forced to be justified through quantifiable evaluation methods.

There are isolated individuals who have attempted to present alternative understandings of learning jazz improvisation. In his illuminating book, Ways of the Hand, David Sudnow explains his

own discovery that learning to improvise jazz is a process of teaching one's hands to 'go for the jazz' so that one's analytic brain doesn't run the show (Sudnow, 2001). The book details his own journey to becoming an improvising jazz pianist, his struggles with a traditional theory based methodology that included learning scales, patterns, and licks and imitation of the great jazz icons. He asserts that this system succeeded into filling his brain with information which he was unable to translate into creative phrases in his playing. It was only after he developed the ability to audiate the music that he was hearing in his own musical mind (aided by singing along with his fingers) that he began to make a connection between what his fingers were playing and his own musical voice in an organic way. The final step was achieved when he began to watch how a great jazz pianist improvised, not what he improvised – how his body moved and his fingers embodied the shape of each phrase.

Critique of standard jazz improvisation methodology

Criticism of the mainstream jazz improvisation methodology has become increasingly prevalent as researchers, educators and musicians attempt to redefine the boundaries of jazz to include global jazz trends and to reflect the importance of personal expression, some claiming that without attention to these two items, jazz is doomed to die as a genre (Nicholson, 2005; Nisenson, 2000).

These researchers point out that the handful of historical treatises and the overwhelming majority of jazz methodologies are largely confined to formulaic approaches particular to respective traditional styles, while largely ignoring the creative process and related cognitive areas. They argue that the current emphasis in jazz education on harmony de-emphasizes more esoteric, intangible

aspects of jazz performance in favor of technical harmonic competence and lessens the amount of individual creativity in jazz performance (Prouty, 2004; Pressing, 1987). Some have claimed that attempting to create art based in idioms from previous eras may produce works that are entertaining and help us to understand artistic creation from the past, but are ultimately inauthentic. Miles Davis, upon hearing young musicians playing bebop and related styles, rhetorically asked, "Didn't we do it good the first time?"3

Jazz, by adopting a methodology similar to that of the classical conservatory, has become a "fossilization of the milieu of a previous time" (Nisenson, 2000) and no longer expresses innovation and a reflection of the times – two elements that were at the heart of jazz's conception and the work of all of its previous icons. As increasingly jazz assumes the postures and attitudes of white classical music, more and more it becomes a clearly defined rigid music, self-consciously insisting on a set of values and judgments by which it can assess not only itself but everything around it. Increasingly it displays an obsession with its own antecedents and a concern that its practice and its past should be institutionalized (Bailey, 1992).

With regard specifically to the common practice of learning and copying patterns from the solos of jazz greats, famous musicians themselves take issue. Art Tatum said of his imitators, "Well, he knows what I did on a record, but he doesn't know why I did it."4

Veteran players actually refer to learned clichés and patterns as 'crips' explaining that improvisers use them in moments when their mind is 'crippled' and they can't come up with anything else (Berliner, 1994). Master trumpeter Miles Davis was quoted as saying that his sidemen only really got loose in the last set of the night, "after they had used up all their well-learned tricks" (Pressing, 1987).

Another criticism of the common jazz improvisation methodology is that it creates a situation in which there is a predetermined 3 Nisenson, p.134 Berliner, p. 104

outcome, a problem-solving process. The student learns to solve the problems that are presented to him either by the teacher or by the particular referent he is working on and can become stuck in this problem-solving mode, having been taught within a system of right and wrong that these are the notes, these are the chords, these are the arpeggios that work on a given chord. Instead, a methodology for improvisation should encourage students to develop problem-finding approaches and create a context in which the student feels comfortable exploring new ideas and experimenting. The notion of teachers as experts must ultimately give way to the more engaged and interactive role of mentors or facilitators (Borgo, 2004).

Gary Peters takes an even more radical view, calling the task of today's improviser the scrap yard challenge. The artist is…

"thrown into a situation piled high with the discarded waste products of cultural history. These are the defunct, clapped-out, disintegrating remnants of past times on the edge of an oblivion that promise, at best, a faint but continuing resonance as nostalgia and the cliché or, at worst, as universal forgetfulness. Improvisation, in the celebratory sense, conceives of itself as transcending these outmoded structures and threadbare pathways through acts of spontaneity that inhabit the moment, the instant, the pure futurity of the “now,” without history’s “spirit of gravity” (Nietzsche) weighing upon the shoulders of the creative artist"(Peters, 2009).

Along these same lines, some suggest that the real challenge of the jazz improviser is to check his habitual responses - for example, his reliance on familiar solutions to a pattern of chord changes - in favor of newly discovered or newly charted desires (Day, 2000).

The effect of all of the above mentioned critiques might be summed up in the following statement by jazz historian James Lincoln Collier:

"With students all over the United States being taught more or less the same harmonic principles, it is hardly surprising that their solos tend to sound much the same. It is important for us to understand that many of the most influential jazz players developed their own personal harmonic schemes, very frequently because they had little training in theory and were forced to find it their own way…The effect has been to a degree disguised by academically trained analysts, who are usually able to explain odd notes by the rooting them in an extension of a more basic chord…In my view, this is not the way these players saw it" (Prouty, 2004).

Research on Personal Voice

Given this ever-growing discontent with the established methodology for improvisation in university jazz departments, it is surprising that so very little research has been done in the field of development of a personal voice in jazz. Though the above mentioned researchers have made various suggestions for inclusion of a free-jazz-type of exploration to balance the present system, there exist almost no attempts to construct a comprehensive alternative approach to jazz improvisation instruction which not only encourages a personal voice but accompanies the student, step by step, in the development of that voice.

One study was done with students of improvisation enrolled in a course of study at the Victorian College of the Arts (VCA), in Melbourne, Australia. The driving philosophy of the VCA program is that each student should attempt to find an individual voice as well as reflect the music of an Australian culture. This program places particular emphasis on the use of original compositions to

assist students in developing a personal voice. Toward that goal, students are encouraged to write original compositions as vehicles for improvisation that capitalize on their strengths and individual musical sensibilities (McMillan, 1996).

Students in the program are exposed to traditional American styles of jazz improvisation as a way to understand rhythmic, harmonic and melodic principles of African American music, after which students are encouraged to seek their own musical direction. Students are encouraged to embrace the spirit of innovation apparent in the great players and aspire to make a personal contribution rather than imitate (McMillan, 1996) All students are encouraged to explore the field of original composition and to present those pieces in their exams and final recitals each year. Breaking from even the mildest hints at traditional concepts, whether in choice of format or instrumentation, is in fact overtly applauded.

The study, which was based on three years of recorded data (final recitals) from 10 participants, categorized style in two ways: conventional and unconventional. Conventional styles included blues, ballads, bebop, Latin pieces, jazz standards and modal pieces with a structured harmonic basis. Unconventional forms included free-form pieces, fusion and contemporary pieces as well as modal music with a non-structured form or a basis other than traditional cyclic harmonic systems.

The researcher recorded and commented on the final recitals of the participants in all three years of their studies. The Ensemble Workshop each year was attended and analyzed by the researcher on a semi-regular basis in an attempt to view the process of the students in their development of a personal voice. Interviews and written comments on performances and workshops were also collected from student participants and instructors.

The researcher identified three factors, which she believes are central to the development of a personal voice: stylistic

independence, risk-taking, and musical relationships forged between musicians (McMillan, 1999).

While this study is laudably comprehensive and presents a long overdue new perspective to the field of jazz improvisation and while I would whole heartedly agree that the three factors stated above that reside at the heart of the research are crucial in the process of developing a personal voice, I believe there are several considerable difficulties resulting from this study. First, The emphasis put on being unconventional in all aspects of creativity ignores the fact that (1) development of a personal voice need not require the musician to abandon all accepted musical parameters; an artist can speak in a new and unique voice also when using more accepted formats, if those formats are in fact part of their musical conception as they envision it; and (2) overtly rewarding (in evaluation) the most extreme expressions of abandon of conventions might present a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water in addition to the fact that encouraging this as the ideal runs the risk of unnecessarily isolating these future players in the outermost fringe of the jazz genre, not to mention becoming dogmatic in itself. Secondly, as a result of this search for the furthest removed the elements by which this research recognized personal voice are at times questionable (as when, for example, the researcher commented that a solo piano composition performance by the student Cassia exhibited only medium risk-taking because the form was through- composed in advance. The piece, as described, was in fact written with a unique classical compositional concept, contained several contrasting sections leading into one another, a considerable amount of varied terrains for improvisation and an unconventional meter of 7/8. Not a typically conventional jazz setting!)

Thirdly, the fact that the researcher personally observed only the final recitals of the participants (and infrequently, workshop classes), might be what led her remarks regarding each student's final performance to focus primarily on compositional aspects,

rarely discussing the student's personal improvisational voice and pointing out, almost exclusively, the stylistic uniqueness of the student's compositional style. Fourthly, the fact that the researcher did not witness the intimate process of development of a personal voice over the 3-year period, only the final product, leaves many questions unanswered as to other elements of the instructional environment that may have contributed to this development and how. In order to answer these questions, I believe, it is essential to (1) have an on-going view of the teacher/student relationship in action, and (2) analyze in-depth the musical improvisations of the student to understand his/her developmental process. And finally, in my opinion, a wider definition of innovation, to include personally idiosyncratic approaches to more conventional structures and formats, would have greatly enhanced the research's understanding of what contributes to and constitutes a personal voice.

Rationale: Toward a Philosophy & Pedagogy of Personal Voice

As noted above in the review of literature, any methodology for the learning of improvisation has at its foundation an unspoken philosophy of what improvisation is. I would suggest that it also has at its foundation an unspoken philosophy of what the process of education is - what it means to teach and to learn – and most specifically a philosophy of arts education. And, if we are going to have any measure of success in discovering an optimal way to teach improvisation in a fashion that encourages a personal voice, we might need to rethink our premises in these areas.

In expounding on his philosophy of education, universal teaching, Jacques Rancière states that the master teacher is one who keeps the student on his own path (Rancière, 1991). This is fundamentally different from the Socratic method whereby the teacher gently leads the student to discover truths that the teacher intends from the beginning. Here, the teacher teaches the student not pre-

known materials but rather to be attentive to everything that he, the student, does and everything around him. He compels the student to continually compare, consolidate and question his own understandings "and so on to infinity. But that infinity is no longer the master's secret; it is the student's journey"(Rancière, 1991). This type of educational environment encourages the student to continually review his experiences and subject then to examination, redirecting himself away from expected, habitual tracks and toward finding his own true direction. The student illuminates his experiences to the point that he comes to trust them, and in trusting them – to trust himself to act true to himself. It follows, that true education cannot take place before self trust (Day, 2000). The teacher's role, then, is not to show the student how to do something but rather to instill in the student confidence to try and attempt what he wants to do even before he knows how to (Bailey, 1992). In a similar vein, Ranier Maria Rilke counsels the student of poetry to stop searching for verification of his art in the opinions of others, but rather realize that his true voice and true critic reside within himself alone (Rilke, 1934). The common thread of these educational philosophies is that education is perceived not as an act of transmitting or receiving factual knowledge, but as a process that involves becoming a different person. "Ultimately, learning is not a matter of what one knows, but who one becomes" (Borgo, 2007).

Jazz pianist Anthony Davis has said that "teaching improvisation is an improvisation" (Borgo, 2007). Going into this study I had a general idea of what I felt was important to acquire and how I thought I might help the students to acquire it. In other words, I had a basic referent. Beyond that I committed myself to following the lead of each individual student. I might even characterize my stance as one defined by stylistic independence from methodology, an openness to my own risk-taking and a commitment to engaging in an honest musical relationship with my students (cf. McMillan, 1996). In other words, I was improvising!

I began the study with certain guiding principals – my own fundamental beliefs - regarding the environment, tools, and modus operandi of the teacher-student relationship that I believed would encourage development of a personal improvisational voice. They included the following…

1. The learning process should be student-directed

In his book, A Philosophy of Improvisation, Gary Peters quotes Hegel as saying, "The universal need for art is man’s rational need to lift the inner and outer world into his spiritual consciousness as an object in which he recognizes again his own self". Peters (2009) writes, "All art is the interest of the self to be a self." The creative journey of improvisation is about the discovery of and expression of an individual self – the student's. Planning a comprehensive generic teaching agenda for such a situation, based on the teacher's preconceived expectations and desires, at best prevents surprises and at worst suppresses the creative disposition (Nachmanovitch, 1990; Hickey,2009).What an art work expresses, fundamentally, is 'this is life as I see it'" (Rand, 1962) and if the fundamental expression of improvisation is the same, it is fitting, that this be reflected throughout the learning process.

Regarding this first conviction, it is crucial to recognize that the student is not a blank slate to be filled with information that the teacher possesses. He comes to this experience with all of his previous musical knowledge and skills, his personal musical temperament, and his personal history both within the field of music and from his life in general. The artist's improvisational voice is a deeply personal one and introduction to this process should begin with and draw on the individual student's musical sensibilities. Therefore, one of the most important roles of the teacher in this student-directed environment is to set up a context in which the student is encouraged to listen critically to what he is

doing and to help him focus his unique voice (Nachmanovitch, 2005). This demands that the teacher develop the skill, as well, to listen intensely to what the student is playing and to recognize not only what the student is trying to achieve but ways the teacher might help him to achieve it.

2. Building, and building-on, self efficacy

Improvisation can be a particularly daunting task both given the situational demands of needing to create on the spot and the emotional/ existential demands of revealing oneself. (The two classical pianists involved in this study came to the task with low self-efficacy in regard to improvising. They were both, in fact, terrified by the idea.) By drawing on the student's already acquired musical skills and sensibilities I hoped to fortify the student's opinion of his own self efficacy by (1) showing him the wealth of tools he already possessed, and (2) continually making clear to him that the process was one of discovering his own personal voice, not assimilating an outside system. Results of recent studies suggest that perceived self efficacy is a major factor in motivation, level of the goals a student sets for himself and the amount of effort he employs to attain those goals, as well as the students' persistence in the face of challenges. (Watson, 2010; Maehr et. al, 2002). I would suggest that self efficacy is directly related to the courage to create and express one's personal voice, to make one's own choices and accept the consequences of those choices. These qualities are all at the very heart of improvisation (Nisenson, 2000).

3. The centrality of exploration

Exploration is the first step for a beginner of any age or ability (Cohen, 1980; Volz, 2005; Kratus, 1995). Central to this pedagogy of improvisation is the distinction between a problem-solving approach where the teacher offers the student solutions to be practiced or sets challenges to help the student arrive at a predetermined success, and a problem-finding approach where, in the course of his exploring, the student discovers his own challenges and subsequent personally viable pathways and solutions. In learning to improvise there must be permission to explore and express. When the goal is the development of a personal voice in improvisation, an exploratory spirit, which by definition takes us out of the tried, the tested, and the homogenous, must be validated. Despite the fact that Kratus (1995) views exploration as only the first and lowest stage in learning to improvise, he does acknowledge that returning to this exploratory approach can be helpful when beginning to learn new skills. We will discuss this circular approach to acquiring skills further on in the analysis of the lessons.

The subject of exploration leads directly to the next two items: the use of structural constraints (referents), and the issue of mistakes.

4. There are no mistakes

It is enlightening to realize that in contrast to the right note –wrong note systems often used to teach jazz improvisation, the actual musicians of the 'golden age of jazz' had a very different perspective on wrong notes. Miles Davis is quoted as having said, "don't fear mistakes, there are none" (Werner, 1996). Thelonious Monk was also very interested in mistakes, and often, when someone playing in his band made one, he would pick up on it and examine it in his own subsequent improvisation (Day, 2000). I would suggest that this is a prime message to send to the student as he explores the keyboard, molding his own personal voice. It is

not rhetoric. The "rightness" or "wrongness" of a note choice is in the perception of the improviser. Its belonging, its making sense, is a direct result of the measure of acceptance the improviser affords it. I prefer to look at notes played that were unintended as the unexpected, rather than a mistake, and improvisation is all about confronting the unexpected and allowing it to lead us in the direction of creative musical ideas.

5. Choosing structural constraints (referents)

In my experience as both a teacher and performer, that structural constraints (ranging from minimal to extensive) enhance the student's focus and present a contra to possible aimless wandering (not that aimless wandering doesn't have it's own specific place in the exploratory process). Even the most minimal form - a recurring rhythmic pattern or a 2-note ostinato - introduced into an improvisation can act as a catalyst for musical creativity (Nachmanovitch, 1990). It provides an underlying order, a constant, upon which the student may feel free to explore (Pressing, 1998).

The choosing of referents in this study, whether created specifically for these students or taken from existing compositions in the global jazz repertoire, received considerable attention. Many of the more minimalistic referents (e.g. ostinatos of various lengths and meters) were constructed by myself during the process of the study in response to specific needs of the student. The majority of the composed pieces used were from the contemporary European jazz repertoire, which I felt was less stylistically restricting than, say, a bebop tune, and lent themselves more freely to a wide variety of conceptual interpretations on the part of the student. A noticeable percentage of the repertoire was original compositions by the student.

6. The use of original compositions as a referent in development of a personal voice

One of the most powerful vehicles for conveying one's personal voice is through original composition. Improvising on a composition that he himself has written, the student is freed from the task of accommodating his inner voice to the restrictions of another artist's piece. Compositional creation and improvisational voice become one as they compliment one another and, through focused improvisational work on original compositions, the student becomes better prepared to subsequently manifest his own sound within an outside repertoire.

Writing one's own music offers a useful means of allowing the student to determine his personal direction in music. The personality and life-experience of the individual composing, or improvising is revealed by the music he or she composes or the way he or she improvises. These individual creative choices constantly reassert the interconnectedness of life and artistic expression (Reason, 2004). Indeed, when people have control over their material and can choose the type of structure that facilitates their improvisational now, the possibility of a personal voice developing is greatly enhanced (McMillan, 1999). As the student draws on his experiences as source material for original compositions, not only does he enable the formation of an individual musical personality but also the "harmonization of that musical personality with his social environment", (Lewis, 2004). This, in turn, encourages his improvisational voice to become a contemporary statement reflecting his own life.

7. The essential connection between fingers and voice: audiation

Gordon has stated that "unless the student can audiate what is seen in notation before he produces sound on an instrument as

dictated by the notation, what he is reading will have only theoretical meaning for him" (Gordon, 1989). I would suggest that the same is true of improvisation and even more so for improvisation that strives to develop a personal voice. If the student cannot audiate, i.e. hear in his musical mind what he wants to play and then execute it, the chances are that his fingers will take over and play independent of his guidance. In the case of accomplished pianists with the technical ability to play at a very advanced level this is common. When the fingers move on their own accord the student is not making conscious musical choices to express his musical ideas. His fingers are, as one of the study's participants put it – "merely messing around". Helping the student learn to hear his inner musical voice and to translate that to what his fingers are playing is a central task of the teacher of improvisation. And it is accomplished, for the most part, by having the student sing as he plays.

In fact, the benefits of singing improvisations (either alone or in conjunction with playing) is of recognized value among jazz educators. Beginning improvisers are encouraged to memorize solos by singing them, training their voices and giving them a grounding in what are for improvisers an essential link between voice, ear, and instrument (Berliner, 1994). Some Jazz educators also advocate learning new theoretical or repertory material by ear and not merely through notation and research has shown this to significantly improve improvisational ability (Kratus, 1991; Azzara, 1999; Gustavsen, 1999; Watson, 2010).

The above mentioned learning processes, while based on the issue of the essential connection between voice and fingers, all address predetermined learning materials (theoretical concepts or solo transcriptions). In improvisation, the use of singing takes on an additional, and distinct role. I would suggest that when the student sings as he improvises, this actually has the secondary effect of silencing his brain's realtime theoretical analysis. (As I told one of my students: "When you sing, your brain cannot at the same time

be involved in calculating theoretically correct responses. In the absence of this mental directing, your fingers follow your voice".) The student's vocal lines then draw on, among other things, only that theoretical knowledge which has already become an organic part of the student's musical voice.

Sudnow makes particular note of this issue in his book, Ways of the Hand, where he discusses how learning to audiate - singing what he wanted his hands to play - was a turning point in his process of becoming an improvising jazz pianist. In the last chapter of the book he tells how he found himself "softly singing with my fingers".

"One may sing along with the fingers, one may use the fingers to blurt out a thought, and one may sing with the fingers. Each is a specifically different way of being. I know just what each of these little slices of space will sound like, as a joint knowing of my voice and fingers, going there together, not singing along with the fingers, but singing with the fingers? How is that possible? I take my fingers to places so deeply mindful of what they will sound like that I can sing these piano pitches at the same time, just as I make contact with the terrain" (Sudnow, 2001).

Gustavsen has summarized the point succinctly.

"When the improvised line becomes 'one with the performer' through the combination of a singing approach and an instrumental approach, we do not get the lack of perspective that can follow from a musician only focusing on his or her instrument, or on the 'inner pressure' in isolation;

we get a unity between music and musician" (Gustavsen, 1999).

8. The art of listening and self-reflection

Beyond changing the face of jazz (several times!), Miles Davis gave those musicians who played with him a way of hearing and responding. As a mentor he cultivated in his sidemen a unique capacity for attention (Smith, 1998).Bobby McFerrin has been quoted as saying that "improvisation is the courage to move from one note to the next" (Werner, 1996). I would expand on this and say that improvisation is the capacity to hear what one has just played and the courage to follow it to the next inevitable note. This ability, to listen intently while at the same time being involved in a continual stream of moments of creating, is not an easy task. The improviser must learn to focus on emergent qualities in the music as it is being produced, not on theoretical aspects in isolation, nor on the "audience" (Gustavsen, 1999). These emergent qualities are continually manifesting themselves in the course of an improvisation. These are the moments of surprise, when the improviser realizes that he is in a dialogue with the music itself. If he is attentive to these moments, if he has learned to listen, he can find ways to respond, to develop and explore these emergent qualities.

Just as honest and focused listening is the work at hand during improvisation, self reflection is the work at hand subsequent to improvisation. Ultimately, the judge and supervisor of the student's improvisation must be the student himself. The student should be asked to critically review his playing after the performance of any musical task - to highlight the growth he sees and to reflect on problems or habitual difficulties and their possible solutions.

9. The incubation period & 'staying with it long enough'

Most methodologies used in academic institutions fall hard under the weight of curricular demands, often forcing teachers and students to cover an objectively specified amount of material, perhaps at the expense of affording enough time for the lessons of each piece and the depth of each musical concept to germinate and become a natural part of the student's musical expression. I was fortunate in the fact that this study was undertaken without such external time constraints. French mathematician Henri Poincare, delineates four stages of creative thought: preparatory phase, incubation period, the 'eureka' moment, and verification. Of these four stages, the second stage, incubation, is the most important (Stubbs, 2002). Cycles of tension and relaxation in the learning process contribute to the ultimate success of the educational goals and unconscious breakthroughs often occur at unpredictable times, commonly as movements shift from one to the other (Schroeder, 2002). For this reason it is logical that the creative process unique to learning improvisation not be rushed or scheduled by an external timetable.

In his book, Effortless Mastery, Kenny Werner suggests that fear is what makes us rush through material without it really becoming part of us. We fear because there's so much to get done. We're afraid we won't become great players (or respected teachers?) at a slow rate and then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy (Werner, 1996). I believe that the student and teacher should stay with each activity until it is mastered, regardless of how long it takes. One well assimilated musical element or improvisational challenge is worth more than ten quickly rushed - through techniques and it is in each deeply invested achievement that successive achievements will have their roots. "In this there is no measuring with time, a year doesn’t matter, and ten years are nothing. Being an artist means: not numbering and counting, but ripening like a tree, which

doesn’t force its sap, and stands confidently in the storms of spring, not afraid that afterward summer may not come. It does come. But it comes only to those who are patient, who are there as if eternity lay before them, so unconcernedly silent and vast" (Rilke, 1934).

In addition to the fundamental beliefs delineated above, I went into this study with two proposed strategies regarding specific aspects of the learning format. The first had to do with the conceptual ground from which we would begin developing the student's improvisation voice – i.e. what we would talk about when we talked about his improvisations. I chose to constrain my suggestions and guidance to basic musical parameters as I heard them expressed, or not expressed, in the student's playing. These included (1) phrases and motives– contour, direction, development, range, length, lyricism, playing across barlines, articulation, and breathing; (2) rhythm – sense of beat, rhythmic variation, groove, polyrhythms, feel, in-time and rubato playing, and the use of silence; (3) structure – the organic unity of ideas and the internal logic of an improvisation, dynamics and texture as tools for expressive development, and the overall arch of an improvisation, and (4) harmony - exploring harmonic colors and polyharmonies, improvising through the changes, and expressing harmony in a melody line. All of these parameters, in my view, fall into the category of how to play. I concluded that speaking in these terms (1) would allow the student to build on already existing knowledge and skills as he began to improvise since he was intimately familiar with these parameters from his previous study of classical music, and (2) would leave the actual choice of what to play – the musical choices – clearly in the hands of the student and his personal musical sensibilities.

The second strategy pertained to the use of exemplary models. The use of models in jazz methodologies is well accepted. As mentioned above, in jazz improvisation programs students transcribe the solos of jazz artists, learn to play them, analyze them, dissect the phrasing, practice isolated phrases from

the solo in many keys, and then learn to transplant these phrases, either as is or in variation, into their own improvisations. Bailey has said, "to say that someone `sounds just like' somebody is usually meant as a compliment. There is considerable pressure on musicians to aim to be no more than very good imitators" (Bailey, 1992). It is obvious, given everything I have written to this point, that I would find this practice antithetical to the task at hand – developing a personal improvisational voice. As Kenny Werner writes in Effortless Mastery, "I've never heard any player of note who plays in any style but his own. You can't get the power of Monk by playing Monk. You can only get it by playing You" (Werner, 1996).

Though I believe that using exemplary models in the above mentioned fashion can in fact have deleterious effect on the development of a personal voice, I would suggest that emulating the great improvisers both past and present does have an important role in this same process. One of the greatest things that an exemplary artist does is to inspire originality in others, not imitation. Day quotes Kant as saying, "the product of a genius is an example to be followed by another genius, whom it awakens to a feeling of his own originality" (Day, 2000). In my opinion, there is much to be gained by attentively listening to great players improvise, noticing how they shape an improvisation from beginning to end, how they use space, how they imbibe each phrase with feel and feeling, and most of all how they speak in their own voice. In his own improvisational journey, Sudnow (2001) came to realize that if any copying of others is appropriate it is in emulating how they do not what they do, the same distinction that was the basis for my choice of what to talk about mentioned above. This subject can be beautifully summed up in the words of Howard Roark, an architect and the protagonist of Ayn Rand's seminal novel, The Fountainhead. When put on trial for his insistence on following his own personal artistic vision, against accepted styles, he tells the jury - "Don't work for my happiness, my brothers – show

me yours – show me that it is possible- show me your achievement – and the knowledge will give me courage for mine" (Rand, 1943). This, in my opinion, is what the study of the great improvisers can afford each of us.

Method of Research

Research participants were selected from students at the Rubin Academy of Music & Dance in Jerusalem. The crucial criteria for participation were (1) the participant did not have any significant experience with improvisation before this research, and (2) the participant was able to commit to the ongoing process of a lesson per week for the minimum length of one year. After an initial weeding-out process, accomplished through written questionnaires. Two classically trained pianists, Guy - studying popular composition, and Salome - studying classical piano and conducting, were chosen from among the volunteers for the study.

Each student received, on the average, one lesson per week which ranged in length from 1 hour to 1 1/2 hours. Several times during the course of the study, lessons needed to be cancelled because of participants' prior obligations to university course work. Often, in those cases, two meetings were scheduled in the following week. By the end of the study Guy had received 50 lessons (over 14 months) and Salome, 32 (over 9 months).

Lessons took place either in my studio or at the academy facility. All lessons were recorded using a Samson USB portable microphone, directly onto a laptop computer using the program Audacity. Recordings were then saved in mp3 format for future analysis. For Guy, a total of 56 hours and 23 minutes were recorded and a detailed analysis was conducted on all recorded materials. For Salome, a total of 27 hours and 37 minutes were recorded and a detailed analysis was conducted.

In addition to their initial personal history questionnaires, each participant was asked to keep a journal in which they recorded their response to the process or to any given task, e.g. things they found particularly difficult or 'eureka' moments.

GuyThe Process - 16 months

Staring PointExpanding Beyond Learned Patterns – lessons 1 -7

I first met Guy toward the end of the first semester of my first year in the Master's of Music Education Program at the Jerusalem Academy of Music & Dance. I had been toying with a variety of ideas for my thesis during those first few months and it was clear to me that the focus would be Jazz education, with specific attention to the teaching of improvisation, but it wasn't yet clear from which direction I would tackle the subject. Guy, a popular composition student at the school and trained classical pianist, had approached me at the school one day and asked if I would be willing to teach him jazz improvisation. We began lessons immediately and by the third or fourth lesson the question as to the direction of my research was answered. It was obvious to me that something fascinating and important was happening in our lessons which needed to be explored. Guy was very enthusiastic and excited by the idea.

It took me an additional week to organize recording equipment for the lessons, create a questionnaire interview for Guy to fill out (so we'd know where he was starting from in the process), and to consult with my advisor on procedure. Below is a summary of our first five lessons, which were not recorded on tape. The descriptions, written after lesson 6, were created from my memory, from referring to Guy's lesson notebook, and from talking with Guy.

In our first lesson, I asked Guy to play for me any piece of music he'd been working on, as well as to sight-read a piece that I gave him. This was to help me get an initial impression of Guy's piano technique and musical sensitivity. We talked a little about Guy's previous musical experiences and I asked him to improvise something – anything he liked, in any way he liked. I must give Guy great credit for this first leap into the unknown…no lifeline attached! The improvisation began with simple cautious musical ideas and ended with large atonal leaps, while using triads exclusively for accompaniment in his left hand.

When he had finished we spoke a bit about melodic phrasing and touch, my intention being to begin to help Guy to articulate the general musical sensibilities that he had developed in his study of classical music and to make these concepts conscious parameters of thinking about and hearing music, a future pool of improvisational choice options.

The first exploration (I don't like the term 'exercise') that we did in this lesson, I call Shifting Chords. Any two major 7th chords located a major second away from each other can be used. We started with C major 7 and Bb major 7. As I accompanied Guy with slowly alternating chords (4 beats each), I asked Guy to improvise over the two chords. Guy settled into this exploration easily and quite enjoyed it. I also introduced Guy to the G-Song, an ostinato of a fifth (G and D) played continuously in the left hand and improvised over in the right hand.

The first time Guy attempted the G-Song he found it extremely difficult and in fact was unable to sustain the pattern while improvising for more than one single cycle. His playing was disjointed and consisted primarily of atonal intervals. I suggested to Guy that, given the task of keeping the ostinato pattern going steadily as he improvised, he should perhaps try playing only one or two notes with each cycle until he began to feel more secure. This he was able to do. I asked Guy to work at home on the G-Song, starting with 2 or 3 notes and only moving beyond that if he was able to keep the pattern steady.

In the first lesson I also gave Guy our first repertoire piece, Tears Transforming, by Norwegian jazz pianist, Tord Gustavsen. The harmony of this particular piece is built exclusively on a B7flat 9 chord, except for 4 bars toward the end – 2 based on G and 2 based on F. Guy played the 2-hand transcription of the piece that I had created from the original recording and then I accompanied him improvising with his right hand only. Instructions were that every time we reached the 4 bars of harmony change, Guy would play the actual notes of the composition, so as not to get involved yet in the difficult task of negotiating key changes while improvising. Guy's improvisation had a nice fluidity but the ideas were disconnected and he played continuously with no breathing between phrases. At the end of this first lesson I sent Guy home to continue work on Shifting Chords (I asked him to work on several pairs of chords), The G-Song, and Tears Transforming. I also asked Guy to start keeping a journal of his impressions of our work together, problems, feelings and personal insights.

In lesson #2, I began to ask Guy to sing with his all of his improvisation., an attempt to help him direct his playing toward a more lyrical improvisation. Guy's command in the G Song was

improved and he was able to sustain the pattern for extended amounts of time. I did notice that he tended to create symmetrical 2-bar phrases and end each on a chord tone. We began discussing basic musical concepts and how they might help him to create coherent musical ideas while playing this exploration. In the next three lessons, we worked on creating and developing short motives, building lyrical phrases, using space between phrases and investigating a variety of modes and harmonic conceptions that the ostinato makes possible.

We continued exclusively with these initial assignments for four weeks and it was not unusual for us to spend an entire lesson on one exploration or one piece. We also spent considerable time in these first few lessons talking about musical parameters, piano technique, and the art of listening, again with the intention of helping Guy to retrieve subconscious sensibilities and consciously make them the ways that he hears his musical creating.

I had asked Guy to compose an original piece for lesson 5 with no specified parameters. Guy brought to that lesson his first original composition, Piano Love, and performed it for me. I asked him to try improvising on it at home for lesson 6.

Piano Love is a quite classically oriented composition clearly exhibiting Guy's influences from the Romantic period of classical music and written in the key of C minor (appendix #X). Its form is 'A' – 'A' (9 bars, repeated in a clear 3/4 meter) 'B' (quasi-recitative). Guy decided in advance that the improvisation on this piece would include only the 'A' part. In his left hand he chose to use an arpeggio accompaniment based on the chord changes throughout the improvisation. The complexity of this composition and difficulties presented in improvising on it were considerably beyond the explorations and initial compositions that we had worked on in the first 5 lessons. However, it was important to me that we begin to integrate Guy's compositional voice, facing whatever challenges this brought.

Guy's first improvisation on Piano Love (Appendix I:i) revealed the wealth of musical material and abilities that he innately brought to our task, e.g. attention to phrase contour and familiarity with harmonic tensions. However, the entire improvisation was at a mezzo forte – forte dynamic, with heavy use of sustain pedal and thick, chord texture.

I asked Guy to play another improvisation using only single root notes in his left hand to outline the harmonic changes and only single notes in his right hand to express his melodic ideas. My intention was that, without the possibility of playing chords in either hand, Guy would begin to explore lyrical possibilities. The single note lines in each hand would allow him to hear more clearly the melodic aspects of his ideas. I also asked him to try and keep his dynamic range within a p – mp range. The idea behind this request was to try and encourage Guy to explore other parameters available for creating dramatic intensity. I did not ask him to refrain from using the sustain pedal but, surprisingly, he did that on his own. What resulted was an improvisation of a completely different standard (Appendix I:i).

This is not to say that Guy was completely successful in this new task. In fact, the entire second improvisation was done in a rubato style with no attention paid to a steady 3/4 beat.

When asked what he thought about the second improvisation, Guy exclaimed, I loved it! He added that he felt "free and flowing - like the G-Song". He was shocked when I pointed out to him that he hadn't used the sustain pedal. He was unaware, but happy, as we had touched on this habit previously. We ended the lesson with a discussion of the various articulation options made available when not using the sustain pedal.

Exploration In FourthsDeveloping an Inner Sense of Beat– Lessons 9 -11

Over the first two months of lessons, I became more and more aware of particular difficulties that Guy seemed to be having. The first, as described above, was his apparent need to play all the time when improvising. Despite extensive discussion about the art of phrasing, this common tendency of beginning improvisers had continued with Guy since the beginning of our lessons. The second difficulty that I perceived was a difficulty in feeling the form which relates to grouping of rhythmic units. This ability to feel the form – whether in individual measures or in an entire composition - is

crucial in improvisation where the form becomes something which the improviser alludes to while at the same time expressing a freedom within it. Guy's willingness to explore as well as his ability to develop interesting and complex melodic ideas seemed to be developing by leaps and bounds, leaving these other two skills behind.

I pondered this enigma for several days after Guy's 8th lesson until a possible solution came to me in the form of what I subsequently called Exploration In Fourths, an exploration which focuses on both of these issues at once.

Exploration In Fourths is an ostinato pattern built on two 4-bar cycles of alternating open-4th chords(each cycle repeated 4 times). It moves at a relatively quick tempo and contains two distinct harmonic centers – 'F' and 'D'. The playing of (and improvising on) this new pattern is designed to develop a strong inner sense of beat and form. The player needs to feel the cycle of 4 bars as it completes since the positioning of the intro chords forces him to create an asymmetrical improvised phrase of 3 bars. In addition, Exploration In Fourths develops the ability to navigate quickly between distantly related tonal centers and find ways to organically connect them, as well as attention to the importance of breathing between improvisational phrases. Since improvising here takes place only on the empty bars after the chords have been played, it creates an obligatory 'breathe'. The student must not only stop at the end of the 3 bars but must find a musical way to finish the improvised phrase.

The choice of 4th-chords (suspended seventh chords) was to create an open and non-decisive harmonic atmosphere, one that is not present in triad harmony. The non-committal sound of the open fourth chord allows the student the freedom to choose whichever mode he feels sounds appropriate for improvisation in each tonality as well as experiment with and alternate used modes. In addition, the placing of the improvisation not on the 'F' chord of the cycle (or 'D' chord of the cycle) but rather over the G sus7, takes the student even further away from his sense of traditional harmony, encouraging him to listen intensely to how his note choices sound with each chord, to hear novel musical combinations beyond traditional harmony. This expanded aural exploring of improvisational possibilities is, I believe, a freedom that is at the heart of developing a personal voice.

In short, Exploration In Fourths is about the challenge of hearing what isn't being stated –rhythmically, harmonically, and melodically. It is, in fact, throwing the student into the deep end of the improvisational swimming pool. The student must confront both the fluidity of and the distant tonics orientation of the harmony as well as the asymmetrical nature of the rhythm by creating new schemata of musical understanding.

I introduced Guy to this new exploration at the end of lesson #8. I began by playing for him a few cycles of the pattern in 'F'. Guy's first response was, I don't understand the meter. At this point I wrote out the rhythmic notation for him in his notebook. I explained to him the two main purposes of the exploration – pulse and breathing – and told him the story of how it came to me. His next question was, but what scale is it in? I explained to him that the exploration is designed for him to choose at any moment what 'F' mode he wants to use when he lands on the second chord – G suspended. And the second center is 'D'? he asked. That's a bit surreal! I proceeded to improvise for him several cycles alternating between the 'F' and 'D' sections. When I finished he had a huge smile on his face. That's so cool! he said, You have good

ideas in the middle of the night! I asked him, jokingly, Are you excited?. Very! he replied.

At the end of that lesson I asked Guy to work on the pattern at home by playing the ostinato in his left and scale runs of continuous eighth notes in the right hand. I asked him to vary his scales and modes without pausing the pattern. What I wanted was for Guy to first get comfortable with feeling the form while playing something known and predetermined before we jumped into the improvising.

When Guy returned the following week (lesson#9), the first thing we did was warm-up with running a variety of F and D modes up and down the keyboard. I assumed that Guy had had no trouble with the scale-only homework and decided to jump right into improvising on the pattern and see what would happen. It was a disaster. Despite the fact that he was able to create interesting and beautiful melodic ideas with his right hand, he was completely lost as to the form. I began verbally announcing to him as each end-of-cycle approached and yet he was still caught off guard, chopping his phrase in mid-line to get his left hand ready to repeat the pattern. After a few minutes I stopped him and said, You look miserable! He laughed and replied, I'm not miserable, it's just really hard!

I decided to step back and take the work stage by stage, practicing together with him. I started by having him play just the left hand pattern for one minute while counting outloud the beginning of each new measure, 1-2-3-4. Then again without counting. No problem here. I asked him to do the same while running scales of eighth notes, without counting outloud. Again he was successful..

The last thing we did with Exploration In Fourths in this lesson was for me to play the ostinato pattern and for Guy to sing improvisations. I 'dressed-up' the pattern a bit with some basslines in my left hand to give a stronger sense of a groove, similar to what one might actually improvise over in a jazz piece constructed on a

pattern such as this. My hope was that Guy would not only be able to feel the cycle of the pattern but would actually succeed in feeling the groove as well, and in this way create more musical and rhythmically-exciting phrases. He appeared quite comfortable with this and the groove element did appear to influence his rhythmic phrasing a bit. Convinced that he was comfortable in the 'F' tonality, I surprised him and moved to 'D'. He immediately noticed and tried to find the new center but was unable. I hinted to him by playing a short D major scale (while keeping the cycle going). What I was trying to tell him was 'listen for the new scale that you want to hear.' He immediately caught on and located his new mode. When we stopped he exclaimed, That was so much fun! What ensued was the following short conversation…

Guy: I like the melodies that I come up with when I sing more than when I don't. Why don't I hear those melodies when I play? It's very intellectual when I play. It's 'stam'. (Hebrew slang for 'meaningless')Judy: It's not 'stam'.Guy: OK, but it's not as nice as when I sing!Judy: Well, I think there's a few reasons…#1, You have to supervise a lot of things at once. You're responsible. You have to keep the left hand going, you're counting the cycles in your head, you have to remember the scales. There's only so much that you can take control of at one time right now. Second, it's easy for your hand to do that – be technical – you have good technique in your hand so you just let it go all over. What you have to do is practice singing with your hand, as it plays, so that the connection starts being made between the melodies you're hearing in your head and what your hand is gonna do. The melodies you just sang were much simpler than what you tend to play. Eventually, the melodies will become more complex till you get to the point where you can simultaneously hear a melody and play it.

Guy: You're right, it was simpler. But I felt like something was happening. When I sing I notice, like, 'Wow! I'm going here, and now I'm going there!

In lesson 11, we started with Guy playing the ostinato and singing improvisations. His ideas were both melodically and rhythmically interesting, and quite similar to what he was able to do in the previous lesson when I was playing the pattern. He was able now to produce a similar level of improvising as he had in the previous lesson when I had accompanied him, while simultaneously focusing his attention on the left hand pattern and moving through the 4-bar cycle. He did still lose track of the form a few times (both how many bars he had played in a given phrase and how many cycles of each tonality he had done). His first two phrases were strictly stepwise scale-based lines (reminiscent of his scale homework on this exploration) but already by the third phrase he was inventing sequences…

vocal improvisation, example 1

In one phrase in 'D', Guy created a beautiful mixture of attention to melody, rhythm, chromaticism and sequence development (though he did lose the count)…

vocal improvisation, example 2

We talked about the need to feel the meter in '1' rather than 4/4 in order to sense the beginning and end of each tonal cycle. After trying this, Guy immediately said, That's much better!' We also talked about trusting one's musical instincts in the choice of improvisational ideas rather than analyzing choices using theoretical knowledge.

In a subsequent attempt in this lesson, Guy was even more fluid. In the next improvisation the first 3 phrases are again stepwise scale-based lines but this time in a sort of a melodic pattern…

vocal improvisation, example 3

In the fourth phrase, Guy was able to incorporate a scale melody, advanced rhythmic ideas and a climactic interval leap in bar 4 (though losing the bar count). This is also the first time that he broke away from the 'F mixolydian mode' he had been using exclusively and combined it with 'F major' (note the E natural in bar 4 of the phrase)…

vocal improvisation, example 4

In the next phrase of this improvisation (in 'D') presents the culmination of all of Guy's above exploring. He combined the mixolydian mode with the major mode, intervallic sequences, and melodically and rhythmically intricate lines…

vocal improvisation, example 5

It became apparent to me at this point that the only location in the pattern where he periodically lost the form was the transitional moments (moving from 'F' to 'D' or back to 'F').

It was extremely encouraging to our process that Guy was able to develop complex ideas vocally and, in almost every instance, hear and produce exactly the pitch that he intended. We continued our discussion of the primacy, at this stage, of audiation over theoretical knowledge as well as the importance of silences and the pitfalls of continually looking for new ideas in the development of an improvised solo at the expense of investigating a single musical idea…

Guy: I feel like I'm getting stuck. Like I'm sticking to one "shtik" instead of finding new ideas.Judy: And you see something wrong in that?Guy: M..hmmJudy: That actually might be the root of a problem - that staying with one idea, in your opinion, is a negative thing. Explain to me how your own impatience with your ideas is something positive (laughs).Guys: When you put it that way…(laughs). If I take an idea and develop it that's good. But if I take an idea and just repeat it, that's not good.Judy: That's not true. Who said that you can't repeat a beautiful idea more than once? This is actually a symptom of something that

you see even in professional musicians who improvise. They have something in the back of their minds telling them, "You gotta come up with something new! But you did that already! Where's the novelty?! " But what you can end up with then is a solo of ten thousand beautiful ideas that have no connection to each other. If you can take the same idea and play it several times, each time with a slight variation, a slightly different take on the same material…that's not "shtik"! That's digging deeply into your idea and finding new characteristics of it.

At this point I asked Guy to try playing his improvisations as he sang them. What followed was a wonderful teaching opportunity. Guy sat staring at the keyboard before he began and said outloud, 'How do I do this?!' I told him that it appeared to me that he was, at that moment, overwhelmed, and he responded that he was. We proceeded to talk about how to approach a daunting musical task by simplifying, starting at a level where you know that you can succeed and building on that. I commented on how many great improvisers have created breathtaking solos with only a few notes. He then began the improvisation (audio track #5) and ended up repeating the first cycle (in F) 6 times without ever switching to the second cycle (in D). He stopped at this point thinking he had lost the pattern of 4 bars. When I pointed out to him that he had just successfully played six cycles of the 'F' section, he was shocked (and a bit upset). I assured him that it didn't matter to me and that I wouldn't have dreamed of stopping him because it was clear that he was having fun, succeeding, and creating such beautiful lines! NOTE: NEVER STOP THE MUSIC FOR THE SAKE OF THE METHODOLOGY!

This first instrumental improvisation reveals Guy's focusing on motivic development, beginning with simple variation and moving to more complex variations. It was, in fact, what I was hoping would happen by asking him to simplify his ideas. It was also the

first time that Guy successfully executed the cycles virtually every time…

Example 6

Guy did one more short Exploration In Fourths (audio track #6) in which he continued to explore motivic development. (He had a particularly artistic one in phrase 4, the first in 'D'!!)

Example 7

Guy commented afterward, 'that was fun because it was simple'. I responded that I would have explained it a bit differently -- Because it was simple, he succeeded, and because he felt that he was succeeding, it was fun.

We returned to this exploration many times over the next few weeks and each time Guy's sense of the form, and musicality of ideas improved. We also worked on the ability to transition smoothly from one tonal center to the next without stopping, using enharmonic tones or melodic lines that naturally moved into the new mode. The first time he tried to do this he continually lost the cycle length of whichever tonality he was in, sometimes playing more than 4 cycles, sometimes less . Eventually he was able to land on a single note, as he began the pattern in the new tonality, that was able to serve as a transition note connecting the two sections. At that point I asked him to try and continue his phrase through that common tone and into the new tonal region. One week we worked just on the moment of transition, that point in the cycle where the phrase weaves from one key into another. In the end, Guy was never able to successfully play through the transition while keeping straight the correct length of the cycles and holding the rhythmic pattern steady, but I believe that the weeks of attention that we paid to this subject were invaluable to his subsequent success in improvising on considerably more complex compositions.

The Melody Hidden in an OctaveFocus on Lyricism - Lesson 14 - 17

In lesson 11, I gave Guy one of my own original pieces as homework, a ballad called I Would Have Called Her Sam. The piece is written in AABA form and is fully composed for both hands. Improvisation happens on the B section only (8 bars long) based on the chord harmonies which alternate twice per bar and move through a variety of tonalities. Work on a piece such as this one is designed to develop the student's sense of lyricism. In fact many ballads are appropriate for work on this topic given that tempos are slow and the student is afforded more time to navigate the many obstacles presented by quickly changing harmonies. I Would've Called Her Sam, I believed, would work particularly well for two reasons: (1) the improvised section is only 8 bars long, and (2) it's unconventional harmonic progressions encourage the student to listen for melodic connections rather than rely on theoretical rules.

In lessons 13 and 14 we focused exclusively on playing the melody of the piece, investigating articulation options, discussing the piece's phrases and recurring motives, and speaking about general pianistic sensitivities. From the beginning of our work together, Guy and I had devoted much time to the topic of lyrical phrasing and its sub-topics – articulation, feel, and organic unity. We would work on a single phrase, perfecting its underlying articulation, directionality, and target notes.

In one lesson, I had Guy sit on the floor and play the piece several times. I had noticed that after many months of lesson, Guy's hand position was still, for the most part, a rigid, highly rounded classical hand position. Based on my own experience as a classical pianist, I believed that this stiffness was counterproductive to his successful acquisition of a lyrical touch and sound. At first I simply asked Guy to lower the piano stool, hoping that this would encourage him to relax his hands. That did not work. Guy struggled to maintain his original hand position and eventual complained that it was very uncomfortable for him. My response was to take a more drastic measure, having him sit on the floor. In doing so, I hoped to (1) focus his attention on the physical sensation of his touch (since he could no longer see his hands he would be more aware of the tactile experience of the lyrical phrases that he was playing; (2) get him to relax hand position and his fingers – there was no possibility of comfortably assuming a highly rounded, stiff classical hand position when was sitting well below the keyboard and gravity was pulling his arms downward; and (3) develop an awareness of how subtle movements of his fingers shape a phrase (In this new position he would need to find alternative ways to shape and control his hand position in order to express the contour of each phrase). This experiment worked beautifully and after only two weeks of 'sitting on the floor' (at home as well!), Guy's hand position and even the way in which he related to hands on keyboard had undergone a transformation, a re-learning which would become a central element of his newly developing personal voice.

At the end of lesson 14, I gave Guy the assignment to practice improvising on the 'B' part of Sam at home. The section in the original piece is as follows…

I Would've Called Her Sam ('B' part)

The first thing I asked Guy to do was to create his own voicings for the left hand chords that requires the least amount of movement from one chord to the next. This was to create a cohesive sound in the harmony as well as to keep Guy from being overly focused on the left hand's role. I wanted him to know what he was going to do in advance. Next, I restricted Guy's right hand to the notes in one octave. This, I hoped, would encourage him to search for the underlying connections between the chords and weave them into lyrical phrases. This single octave approach also introduces the student to the sound of chord tensions, as many of the limited number of notes available to him in one octave are not present either in a given chord or in the chord-scale implied by that chord. In this way, the student is encouraged to explore the sound of these tones, making choices as to where his own musical sensibilities lie. The improvisation was slightly more cohesive.

At the end of the next lesson (lesson 15) Guy improvised a bit on the piece. He continually played wrong chords and appeared uncertain as to how he wanted to position each chord. His improvisation sounded like he was attempting to chase the changes –grabbing for notes that theoretically made sense - and yet missing as much as he succeeded. I stopped him after two choruses of improvisation …

Judy: What I'm hearing is that on each new chord you're switching gears. That's true isn't it?Guy: Yah. Well, it's not easy! Every chord is a different world. The harmony goes crazy!

I played for Guy a sample improvisation on the section, within an octave, which didn't relate to each chord separately.

Judy: The one thing that I was doing that I suspect you weren't doing was 'listening' to what note I had just played and where my ear told me it should go next.Guy: O.K.Judy: Don't analyze the chords. Listen to what is happening. Let your ear tell you where to go next.

I asked Guy to try again, this time within an octave and singing with his improvisation. The result was simple but successful.

Guy's improvisation on one chorus

The next time we worked on Sam was two weeks later (lesson 17). In his first few attempts, Guy gingerly made his way by stepwise motion only, like a man climbing up a mountainside afraid to take too large a step lest he lose his footing! His note choices were all 'appropriate' but the results were a bit uninspired. I pointed out to him that he seemed to be relying on scale-wise lines and suggested that he tried to incorporate a few well placed 'leaps'. I also asked Guy to sing while he played his next improvisation. The resulting improvisation (audio track #7) was well executed with interesting ideas, breathing between phrases, and more subtle articulation (Appendix I:ii). Guy's own response was to say, 'It immediately makes a difference when I sing.'

It appeared to me that Guy's lyrical sense, harmonic exploration, and phrasing were all developing by leaps and bounds. The dimension that seemed to be lagging slightly behind was Guy's

sense of rhythmic possibilities (as discussed in the chapter Exploration in Fourths). After a short discussion and my suggestion that he try to vary his rhythmic ideas beyond syncopated 8 th and 16th note patterns, Guy made a second attempt at the piece singing along with his improvisation. It was a beautiful improvisation but Guy remained stuck in this mode, seemingly unable to vary it or to create faster lines.

In the hope of getting him comfortable with executing faster, rhythmic ideas, I decided that I would play the accompanying chords and asked Guy to improvise fast lines detached from the beat – quasi rubato (this style, in jazz, is called playing out-of-time). My goals were to remind Guy what it felt like to run his fingers quickly across the piano keys (a sensation that any classical pianist is very familiar with but that can be daunting when improvising) and to encourage Guy to explore other rhythmic possibilities by detaching him from what appeared to be his felt obligation to state a steady 4/4 meter. As I suspected, Guy took to this with no problem at all creating fantastically fluid and expressive out-of-time lines with remarkable 'feel' (audio track #8). When we finished he immediately yelled, Again!

At this point, I also devised a new task in which Guy could explore and practice the important jazz technique of playing through changes - creating cohesive improvisational ideas that embrace several chords in sequence. I called it the expanded G-Song. In this version of the ostinato, the left-hand alternates between several different pairs of notes while keeping the 'G' as a pedal point…

Whereas in the original G-Song where the right hand both creates melodic lines and references harmonic changes, here the left hand hints at a variety of possible harmonic progressions (e.g. when the improvisation begins in G major: G – Cm/G – C/G – F/G; when the

improvisation begins in G minor: Gm – Eb or Cm/G – etc. ) and the role of the right hand is to find lyrical ideas that establish a connection between those changes. In this expanded G-Song the choice of how long any given harmonic pattern continues or in what order they appear is left up to the student. Below is a section from Guy's first attempt at this exploration…

A section from Guy's improvisation on ''expanded' G-Song

I immediately noticed that Guy did not pause the improvisation as he changed chords. This already was a huge accomplishment. Guy used several techniques to create lyrical improvisational lines that move through the harmonic changes without insisting on playing the chord tones -– (1) he started simple, as discussed above, using only G major until the last note of the last bar, maximizing the connected sound of the improvisation; (2) he used the first tetrachord of the G major scale, almost exclusively, over all chords

(in Cm this creates a minor-major scale; in C major it highlights the upper extensions of the chord, the 6th and 7th degrees); (3) The upper tetrachord of G major and extended scalewise melodic lines he generally reserved for the G chord; (4) Guy often used motivic repetition to create a bridge between distinct harmonic regions – as in bars 4-5, 12-13, and 14-15. The improvisation is rich in sophisticated metric displacements and motivic development.

Unfortunately, we only worked on the expanded G-Song for two lessons as we began to work on several complex compositions at once and became involved in those. However, several weeks later at the start of lesson 26 Guy asked me if he could play it again for me. A section of that improvisation can be found in appendix I

In lesson 18 we continued to work on Sam along these lines. In lesson 19, Guy was able to execute out of time phrasing while playing the accompaniment himself. He also mentioned that it had helped him to learn the chord changes of the piece by heart because, 'now I know where it's heading, what's about to happen before it happens'. In my opinion, this was a crucial discovery for Guy.

Putting the Pieces Together Twins - lessons 19-26

In lesson 20 we began what I will call – building repertoire. Having laid the foundation over the first four and a half months with a variety of explorations, we now turned our attention to actual compositions in which Guy would have to pull together the concepts, skills and techniques we had focused on and implement them in more complex compositions from the contemporary Jazz repertoire. The present building of repertoire would, over the course of the next eight months, include 6 compositions that I had chosen and 3 of Guy's later original compositions, written after Guy had made considerable progress in his improvising abilities .

I chose to begin with the piece Twins by Norwegian jazz pianist Tord Gustavsen. This multi-sectional composition includes a

number of different musical settings. The piece is divided into two larger sections, almost identical but in different keys. The first section is 16 bars long and the second, 20 bars long. Each of the sections begins with a 5 bar pedal point (a modal setting), moves to a 4 bar ii-V-I progression (a traditional 'jazz' setting) and ends with another pedal point. The harmonic relationship between these small multi-bar units is unconventional as is the relationship between the two sections of the piece (e.g. the first section is in C minor and the second, though presenting the exact same melody is n Bb minor). In addition to these challenges, I chose this piece for the possibility it afforded to begin discussing jazz harmony with Guy in a small and undaunting fashion.

The progression: iim7-V7-Imaj7 is the backbone of jazz standards, defining the majority of jazz tunes found in the Real Book and the overwhelming majority of tunes learned by jazz students. It might even be said that the minute one hears this progression in a song one thinks jazz even if it is only a temporary moment in a longer piece.

In standard jazz piano harmony the pianist's left hand plays what are called voicings, that is, chord constructions without the root note (since more often than not this is covered by the bass player), and with additional chord extensions such as the 9, 11, and 13. These voicings have their own unique construct and voice leading rules and demand of the jazz pianist to hear what is not being played, i.e. the root note of each chord, in order to create a logical and fluent improvisation.

At this point in our lessons I felt it was time to introduce Guy to this unique system of harmony, a system that was foreign to him having grown up in the classical music world, and to help him begin to hear the extended possibilities available in jazz harmony. Students of jazz piano generally learn several standard chord voicings and voice leading strategies to get started and so, in preparation for improvising over Twins, I wrote out for Guy two standard ii-V-I

voicing patterns and sent him home to learn them and use them at the proper moments in the piece.

For the first few lessons on this piece we spent considerable time on Guy's arrangement of the melody or the 'head' as it's called in jazz. As I told Guy in one of the lesson, 'The more inspired the presentation of the melody is the more inspired the improvisation will be. It's based on that melody, both the style and the beauty of the arrangement, and how much you're enjoying yourself playing it!' I do believe that in general jazz musicians have a tendency to neglect the original composition and focus their attention on their own improvisation, overlooking the fact that a player's improvisation exists by virtue of the composition and one's own personal connection to it. Guy's very first improvisation on Twins in lesson 20 can be found in Appendix I:iii.

Given the complexity of the structure and harmonic movement, Guy navigated the piece extremely well and utilized many of the skills he had acquired in previous lessons: (1) in each phrase he played through the changes rather than playing chord tones - worked on in lessons 14-17 with the inside an octave exercise, (2) he created transitions between phrases, (3) there was a clear directionality of his melodic lines arriving seamlessly at target notes rather than leaping to them – worked on in lesson 11 with Exploration in Fourths, (4) he developed a melodic motive – worked on with the G-Song in lesson 21, (5) he created a contour to each phrase, (6) he highlighted poly-tonalities – worked on in lesson 14 with the G-Song, and (7) he made use of chord extensions in a manner that emphasized their unique relationship to the basic chord, not merely as part of a melodic line.

Guy did however revert back to several of his default habits including: playing almost exclusively in scale-wise movement, an over abundance of syncopated and triplet lines, endless non-breathing phrases (there are no real 'rests' the entire length of the improvisation), forte

dynamics and loud chords, and a thick arpeggio accompaniment in the left hand for much of the improvisation. To solve these problems I asked Guy to try again, this time playing at a 'piano' volume and using the jazz voicings we had learned last week when he arrived at the 4 bar jazz progression in the middle of each section.

Both of these new requests were extremely difficult for Guy. By the beginning of the second section he was already back to a forte volume and each time he arrived at the ii-V-I progression his left hand got confused, hit wrong chords or notes and he stopped. I had him spend a few minutes working out the voicings. When I saw how uncertain he was I asked him to work on the progression in a loop to get comfortable. Unfortunately, he couldn't do this either so I asked him to work on it at home. I explained to Guy that I didn't want the jazz voicings to become a new default, just another option and most importantly that I want him to begin to hear those extended chord sounds.

We did three more tries of an entire chorus and each time when he arrived at the ii-V-I progression things fell apart and he either stopped or the improvisation became a jumble. The first thing he said as he stopped after the last try was, 'This is a horrible piece to improvise on!' We ended the lesson by talking about a few of the musical challenges we had encountered and I told Guy, 'On this piece we're going to work on everything we've talked about in the last 6 months'.

I must admit that I was shocked at what had happened in this lesson. I had come to know Guy as an incredibly quick learner, able to master even the most difficult of tasks within the space of one week. My interpretation was that he had not spent sufficient time learning the voicing patterns, despite the fact that they were only two sets of 3 chords each. He assured me that he had spent time on them.

-----------------------------------------------------------The 'Mistake' - Choosing Improvisational Restrictions

It was only after the lesson was over and I had turned off the recording equipment that Guy confided in me that despite the fact that he had spent quite a lot of time trying to learn the jazz voicings, in his words, they just don't make sense to me. That was the moment at which I understood my mistake. I turned the recording equipment back on and we had the following conversation…

Judy: I want you to say again exactly what you just said and then explain it to me.Guy: These voicings don't make sense to me. Everything we do (usually) is something that I know. It's already something in my head.Judy: In other words, all the things we've done to this point were based on understanding that you already have.Guy: RightJudy: We've simply been building on those things and exploring how to use the abilities that you already have.Guy: And because of that I have opened up and discovered new things and used them. I've freed myself up and am able to do a lot of things that I couldn't do before.Judy: Very much so.Guy: And last week when you added the voicings, on the one hand I don't think it's advancing because now I can't do what I want to do. But it's good I can't always do what I want to do because I want to play jazz in the end! On the other hand, suddenly it's much less straight forward and it doesn't go in as easily because it's kinds of patterns and I have to…I don't know.Judy: Well… you understand that together we are attempting something not completely clear. We're kind of searching for the 'truth' together. (both chuckle) You know what I mean? We're both moving in a direction that is revealing itself as we go. Yes? You understand what I'm saying?Guy shakes his head.Judy: So, I'm going to change my mind, which I have done several times in the last six months! I don't want you to deal with the voicings, ok?Guy: Why?Judy: Eh eh! I just don't want you to deal with the voicings. What I do want you to do is – you have this piece Twins that twice in the piece there's a jazz progression…I want you to search for – and

believe me this is much more difficult than learning patterns – your own way to navigate the progression. How would you construct the chords to show my ear that we are moving through a ii-V-I pattern? I want you to figure out how you would do it. Guy: OK.Judy: And if you want to add additional notes like the 9 or the 13 or whatever then do it.Guy: Why is it good for me to look for a voicing if there's already a good one? The best one…Judy: It's not the best or the worst. It's just the standard one. It works.Guy: Yeah, it works. But you think I can make up something else?Judy: I definitely think you can make up something else! The fact that it works doesn't mean that it's right for you or the way that you hear a jazz progression. Fact in point – it didn't sink in with you even after a lot of hard work. So we have two options – break our heads over it until it does sink in or to leave it and for you to search for what sounds right to you. When you encounter a jazz progression what do you hear in your head. In hindsight I'm happy that you had so much trouble with this issue because it's possible that this is what we should have done from the beginning.Guy: As we do anything!Judy: Yeah.

At the end of our conversation I gave Guy an additional piece of homework. As he practiced the ii-V-I in a loop at home, he should write down phrases that he improvised that he particularly liked, learn them by heart, and be able to play them for me next week. My motivation was twofold - (1) I wanted Guy to be able to work on the progression with preplanned phrases so that he would begin to be able to connect the two hands successfully, and (2) I wanted him to begin audiating the progression in both hands in a personal way.

------------------------------------------------------------Unfortunately, at the next lesson (lesson 21) Guy had not learned his original ii – V – I phrases well enough to allow us to work with them. I explained to Guy that my goal was for him to use these written phrases when he arrives at the jazz progression in the improvisation. His immediate response was – But then it's not

improvising. I told him that he was right but that it would allow him to begin to hear and express the progression in both hands simultaneously. Guy did bring up the point that the improvised phrases he came up with when practicing the jazz progression were possibly different than ideas that would flow from an entire improvisation. I complimented him on that insight and told him that I agreed. So, for the next lesson I asked him to write down ii-V-I phrases that he had created as part of an entire chorus of improvisation and pointed out to him that this would require tremendous concentration and listening ability.

What Guy had done in the course of the week was to devise his own 'voicings' for the jazz progression of the piece which were original and suitable. We spoke about other left hand options, many of which were new to Guy – open 4th and 5ths, clusters, etc. Guy was surprised that these were actually viable options for accompanying an improvisation. This opened a discussion of how the right and left hands balance and compliment each other in an improvisation and neither hand is exclusively relegated to stating the harmony. He was still using a majority of arpeggios of the chords (except for the jazz progression) and admitted to me that this accompaniment sometimes made him feel 'like I'm on a runaway train and can't stop.' I asked him to practice this week only using sustained block – static – chords throughout.

I complimented Guy on the fact that he was so successfully navigating this difficult piece with his improvisatory lines, in control of the flow of the various modes he chose to use for each section. I told him that now it was time to harness that sometimes meandering flow and shape it into conscious musical phrases that create a continuous and organic statement.

To accomplish this I presented to him with a new 'restriction' for the coming week. He would begin each improvisational chorus of the piece with a motive that he had improvised spontaneously over the first two bars. The procedure was that Guy would improvise on

the first 2 bars, find a motive that he liked, play it several times so that he remembered it well, then use it as the melodic material in the entire chorus. The motive would be transplanted from section to section, chord to chord, of the piece. Slight variations were allowed. My motivation in this assignment was to develop Guy's ability to respond in realtime to the emergent qualities of his own improvisations. This required an intensely focused listening to what he was playing. That focus, I felt, could best be developed by starting with a given original motive. As he progressed I envisioned that Guy would be able to transfer this focused listening-responding to a continuous stream of spontaneous ideas as they presented themselves in his improvisations. In this same lesson we had begun using this devise in the G-Song.

The following week (lesson 22), Guy performed several highly successful improvisations each beginning with an original motive and using it throughout the improvisation (Appendix 1:iii). He had created his own chord voicings the week before and was now comfortable with them in all sections of the piece.

We had the following short conversation when he had finished…

Judy: So you just saw that with a small idea you can build a larger idea that continues for 40 bars! It didn't sound boring or like you had run out of ideas. It sounded organic. It also created natural space – pauses - between the phrases.Guy: That's right!Judy: The silence between the ideas was as important as the ideas themselves.Guy: Uh huh. And I really liked taking that motive and inventing new ways to use it! And it made things so much easier for me!Judy: How?Guy: Because until now I've been thinking – to improvise on Twins I have to make it through all this (runs his hand down the length of the page of music). There's so many chords! What a mess! But with the motive it all passes easily and I feel like I'm succeeding in creating something.Judy: After you practice this one-motive type of improvisation for a week and you come back and I tell you that you can start to be a bit freer you'll see that you've already conditioned yourself to have a main idea and you'll find ways to develop it and expand on.

And the following week (lesson 23) we did just that. I asked Guy to begin his improvisation with a spontaneous motive and immediately continue on using it as the building blocks of an entire chorus of improvisation. This time Guy would not have the advantage of having worked on the motive at home, exploring variations and checking possible transposition options in advance. This proved virtually impossible for Guy with half a dozen failed attempts. He either couldn't remember the motive for long enough to develop it or he quickly allowed himself to get swept away and abandon the restriction completely – at which point he almost always began to confuse the chords and the structure. He found his lack of success extremely frustrating, often stopping suddenly in mid- improvisation and slamming his hands down on the piano keys. Once he stopped and said to me, "I'm sorry. This is really hard". Another time he stopped suddenly and blurted out, "I suck!" And when we decided to stop for the day he half laughingly said, "Wow, piano lessons are hard! More than any other course in my schedule!"

In the end, I decided to go back to what we had done a week earlier. I asked him to work at home using the last motive he had invented in today's lesson and to exploit all the possible ways to use and develop it. But the following week (lesson 24) was no better. If anything Guy's frustration was worse because now he was trying to use a 'known entity', a motive he should have learned inside-out over the course of a week, and not succeeding. He continued to complicate the motive, lose the motive in a multitude of spontaneous notes and intricate left-hand accompaniment. After several failed attempts we stopped and I said, 'I'm trying to help you learn to appreciate the beauty of one small idea and see how it 'bounces off' multiple things and you're going for all kinds of other stuff. Guy replied, 'I have a serious problem with this piece.' No you don't, I said. You don't have a problem with this piece. You have a problem with focusing on one thing alone and being happy

with that.' . In the end, we decided that we would spend another week on preplanned motives that he would compose at home.

That same evening I wrote Guy an email encouraging him and expressing my faith in his ability to tackle all the challenges that he had found so overwhelming at that day's lesson. I have copied one paragraph of his response below. In it he admits an added element of his frustration, or perhaps disillusionment is a more fitting word…

"Piano is the most important thing in my life. I see myself as a pianist and have always believed that I am quite a good one. In today's lesson I felt tremendous insecurity. I disappointed myself. If in the not so distant past I was playing Rachmaninov, why can't I play a chord progression without getting confused! I don't see myself anymore as a classical pianist but I['m not yet a jazz one. This 'middle ground' neither here nor there – is very hard for me."

In my response to his letter I admitted to Guy that I had experienced exactly what he was now when I first made the switch from classical music to jazz. I explained to him how this had forced me to go back and work on basic elements of music and had taught me to focus on one small task until it was mastered - each small piece of the puzzle, as I succeeded, making the next not only easier but the understanding of that next step much deeper. And, of course, I reiterated my faith in Guy's ability to master all of the skills we were working on and in addition, eventually develop his own personal voice in the jazz style.

The following week (lesson 25) Guy brought several preplanned motives to the lesson. Despite obvious advancement, Guy was still dissatisfied and frustrated with his improvisation (Appendix I:iii) . As he finished he exclaimed, 'That was terrible! I asked him what he had felt was lacking and he replied, Music! That wasn't music! I assured him that he had succeeded quite creatively in everything I

had asked of him and that we were not at this point expecting masterpieces but rather focused success at one task, which he had accomplished. His response was – It’s not easy! I don't feel secure in my hands. And it feels very mechanical. I was glad he had chosen that word – mechanical – and told him so. I explained, You're right. What I'm asking you to do is very mechanical but it is designed to help you begin to hear and create connections in your improvisation – to discover ways to exploit one idea before moving on to the next. This small task is the way to get used to that and it has as much to do with 'hearing ahead' as it does with your fingers feeling comfortable executing. It's a matter of developing fingers, mind, and ears all together.

The following week (lesson 26) I again asked him to use a preplanned motive as one of the bases of the improvisation but allowed him greater liberty with freely improvising spontaneous elements as well (Appendix I:iii). Before he began, Guy had expressed more confidence in the task at hand and when he finished he actually exhibited some pleasure in the results as seen in his immediate response - I expected better but I'm happy I succeeded!

After two more weeks of focused attention, Guy was finally able to create several cohesive and creative solos built on a series of spontaneous motives throughout the improvisations. In lesson 28 after a particularly successful improvisation on the this piece, he commented "That was fun! I felt good! I've never felt like this when I played this piece! For a long time this piece has felt mechanical to me. Today it finally doesn't."

Learning to Swing: The Message/EST; Everybody's Song But My Own/Kenny Wheeler; Driftin'/Herbie Hancock – Lessons 25 -36

After 6 months Guy had, in my opinion, made significant progress in mastering the basic tools of improvising and was consistently producing musical improvisations even on complex compositions. He had developed a rich and unique harmonic sense reflected in his original compositions as well as his choice of scale-mode materials and his idiosyncratic relationship to the harmonic possibilities of his improvised phrases. He had a firm sense of beat and form and

was able to construct improvisations that revealed an ability to connect past musical ideas with future musical directions. His improvised phrases exhibited an awareness of shape and direction using elements of articulation to give those phrases an inner contour and movement. It was time, I decided, to introduce him to one of the more difficult and elusive aspect of jazz improvisation – swing.

Swing is the unique rhythmic timing – feel – of traditional jazz playing. It is that element that when you hear it you say – That's jazz! And it is a given that every jazz musician, even the most contemporary minded, can swing. I did not, however, begin working with Guy on this technique in order for him to be able to play jazz in a traditional fashion. In my opinion, swing is a lesson in the intricacies and power of touch. The player who has mastered swing has mastered the ability to be aware of and adjust the attack, pressure, and articulation of every finger on his hand – allowing for the possibility of each note having a unique musical personality. It follows then that the ability to swing influences the jazz musician's sound in everything he plays.

Technically, swinging happens on the eighth notes of a melodic phrase. The weight or accent is displaced from the common placement on the first eighth note (the beat) to the second eighth note. This backbeat accent in turn has the added effect of delaying the entrance of the subsequent 1st eighth note, creating what jazz players term laid back – being slightly behind the pulse of the beat. There are a variety of ways in which swing has been theoretical defined: (a) similar to a dotted eighth and sixteenth note – most common in old school playing from the '20's and '30's, (b) similar to a triplet pattern with the middle eighth note absent – common in Bebop and Hard bop of the '40's and '50's, and (c) as equal eighth notes with an accent on the second of the pair – contemporary swing style…

swing a

swing b

swing c

This abundance of definitions, I believe, further points to the elusiveness of the swing feel and it's indefinable quality. In my own experience, none of these theoretical understandings are helpful in acquiring the swing feel and so I decided to have Guy transcribe a swing piece and improvised solo with the explicit idea of copying, note for note, the articulation that the pianist used and then imitating that articulation in an improvisation of his own. I chose the composition The Message by Swedish jazz pianist, Esbjorn Svensson of the band EST, not only because it is a superb example of contemporary swing (example 'c' above) playing but because the entire piece is based on one chord – G7 (see appendix). This, I hoped, would allowed Guy to focus exclusively on touch without being distracted by having to keep up with complicated harmonic changes.

For lesson 25 I asked Guy to learn the melody of the piece and to transcribe 8 bars of the pianist's solo playing only the right hand. This he was able to do quite convincingly. We had the following conversation afterward…

Guy: It's very undefined – the timing.Judy: You're right. It is undefined. To get it you have to be able to 'play undefined'.

Guy: Here he does something I really like (Guy points to one particular bar). He doesn't play this note but it's as if he is playing the note!Judy: What you just picked up on is very important to the 'feel' of playing jazz. They're called 'ghost notes'.

We talked about ghost notes – notes that the pianist's hand plays but with such minimal pressure that they are barely audible. The crucial secondary effect of a ghost note is that it keeps the pianist's hand in motion in such a manner that the next note has a different accent than if it had come after an actual pause. Guy summed up his first encounter with swing - It's a really strange touch!

The following week (lesson 26) Guy performed an excellent rendition of the melody and 16 bars of the solo, playing along with the original recording…

Guy: "This is so much fun!"Judy: Your articulation in the last two weeks has gotten so much better. Even when you play the G-Song. You're starting to move your hand around like a jazz pianist not like a classical pianist playing jazz rhythms.Guy: Yeah!Judy: I'm looking at your hand and I'm listening to what's coming out and it's got this like…Guy: attack!Judy: Yes! And that's what makes this very simple solo so amazing and so difficult. Every note has a separate attack and the weight is on the back end of every 2 eighth notes. In jazz your hand has to be as much the instrument as the piano. It's the conductor and it has to be lazy on the keys.

In lesson 27 I noticed that whenever Guy did not precisely reproduce Svensson's swing, he played the swing feel as if it were written as a triplet figure (example 'b' above). I knew from conversations that Guy had never listened to traditional swing style playing of the '40's and '50's but I also knew that he was being introduced to that style in a two jazz courses - Jazz Arranging and Jazz Harmony - that he was taking at school. I decided that we would work on a contemporary swing feel with a steady line of eighth notes, paying attention to the shape and movement of the hand and the subsequent sound produced. We focused on the

following 5-note motive from the transcribed solo and I asked Guy to play after me, paying attention to what my hand was doing.

I pointed out to Guy that my hand plays the rhythm not just the notes. It continues to move even when there are no notes to play. I told him that "Playing the rhythm means that your hand continues to dance even if there's a rest." We continued this for several minutes and Guy eventually was able to reproduce the same feel that I was playing. I then pointed out to Guy that "my hand 'travels' across the piano. My hand is playing the notes, the rhythm, and the direction of the phrase." We continued for several minutes more until Guy was succeeding about 80% of the time. We then continued working phrase by phrase on Svensson's solo to see how he articulates different rhythmic and melodic patterns.

In lesson 28 I gave him a video recording of Esbjorn Svensson and asked him to watch, paying attention to the pianists hands and how they moved. Guy continued from week to week to bring additional transcribed sections of the swing solo and each week we worked phrase by phrase to master the feel of the pianist. Each week he performed the piece along with the playback, mirroring the swing feel that the pianist was using.

In lesson 32 we began improvising on a jazz swing piece – Everybody's Song But My Own, by Canadian flugelhorn player Kenny Wheeler - that I had given to Guy the week before. I had decided to test out Guy's swing abilities on a more harmonically complex composition (the reader will remember that The Message was built entirely on the chord G7) and without the aid of a playback. Guy exhibited an excellent sense of swing rhythm in the melody presentation (head) and the ability to subtly disguise the underlying 3/4 meter with poly-rhythms. However, as he began to improvise he locked himself inside that same 3/4 meter by holding a static left hand pattern of a root note quarter note followed by a

half note chord, both in a low register. I imagined that he most likely did this to keep himself in the right place harmonically and meter-wise and pointed out to him the stagnating effect it had on his right hand improvisation by pulling the swing feel onto the beat. I suggested he imagine that he has a bass player playing the root notes and pointed out to him that our goal was for him to hear the harmony in his head while he improvises without explicitly stating all aspects of it. I decided to play the root notes of the harmony for Guy as he improvised, his left hands supplying only chords. But without playing the root notes himself Guy was lost. He continually lost his place in the harmonic progressions of the piece and improvised continuous nonstop lines as if trying to supply something in his right hand that was missing in his left. After several tries he did played an impressive improvisation –given that this was the first time he had ever improvised on a mainstream jazz swing piece - however the contemporary swing element of his performance was inconsistent (Appendix I:iv).

When we finished, Guy complained that with me playing root notes his left hand was forced to stay in a higher register and that this "left no room for the right hand's improvisation". My response was - You have half a piano! I pointed out to Guy that the reason he had so little room was because he was holding every chord down for security. If he were to play light, short chords in the left hand, the mid – low register would continually open up again for the right hand to move in. This would also give the overall swing feel a more genuine sound. We talked about how in a successful improvisation the two hands work as a unit, weaving their way in and out of each others lines and the fact that the left hand's accompanying style is crucial to the swing quality of the right hand. Guy's subsequent improvisation was quite improved. The left hand chords were played on a variety of beats which created not only a more interesting texture but allowed the swing of the right hand phrases a lighter platform on which to swing. For homework, I asked Guy to continue working on playing the left hand chords shorter, softer, higher, and on a variety of beats in the bar. I asked him to learn the

harmonies of the piece by heart and also to refresh his memory of contemporary swing feel with EST's The Message and to try and transplant that feel to this piece.

Lesson 33, two months after we had begun working on swing, was the breakthrough lesson. Guy began the lesson with the G – Song and throughout the effects of our swing study were obvious. Guy created a languid laidback feel – without swinging since the G Song is written with straight eighth notes – and used his newly attained ability to vary articulation with each note, often accenting the back beat and giving the entire improvisation an exciting energy (track # ?). In addition, this was the week that Guy finally played his own improvisation on the Esbjorn Svensson piece, using the recording as his backup band (Appendix I:iv).

Reaching the point where he could consistently express a contemporary swing feel in more harmonically complex compositions would rest, I believed, on thorough familiarity with the composition in all of its facets to the extent that he would be free of any distraction that may result from insecurities regarding those other elements. That is why I asked Guy in lesson 33 to improvise on Kenny Wheeler's piece without the chart. This proved quite difficult for Guy and as a result he not only confused the harmonies, even in the head, but reverted back to using 1-2-3 rhythm (quarter note – half note) in his left hand that we had talked about in the previous lesson. He stopped in middle of improvisation and exclaimed, Oof! I can't play this!

One of the most immediate problems apparent was that he couldn't 'find the swing' after playing the head. He continued improvising in the solo for the most part playing straight eighth notes. This fact - that he lost the swing feel amidst the complication of the tune - was the first indication that the technique of swing was still not a natural part of Guy's articulation repertoire to be retrieved on command. In addition, when he did 'swing', the swing feel was not the one we had worked to acquire from EST's The Message but

rather a limping, amateur copy of old fashioned swing style he had used before.

It was in the following week's lesson (34) that Guy revealed to me that two weeks earlier he had, in fact, begun work on a big band arrangement of this piece for his course in jazz arranging at the academy. The teacher had asked the students to choose their own piece for the assignment and, given Guy's great love of this composition, he had chosen it. This revelation came after Guy's first attempt in this lesson to play and improvise on the piece. After the improvisation, I had told Guy that what I was hearing was someone trying to sound like a jazz player. I heard little of the Guy of previous months – none of his idiosyncratic lines, organic connections or lyrical approach. Absent was the perfect execution of contemporary swing I had heard in his improvisation on The Message. I recognized instead hints of a traditional swing jazz influence as well as hints of chord-scale theory, commonly taught in jazz harmony classes, as Guy shaped his phrases almost exclusively around the harmonic changes of the piece (track ?).

When asked how he felt about this improvisation Guy said that he liked it very much and felt that he succeeded in creating "interesting ideas" while at the same time following the changes. I complimented Guy on successfully navigated this complicated piece and added, "What I heard, though, is that you are trying very hard to navigate the changes…ideas that don't have much connection one to another but – successfully navigated. Guy's response was – "You say this as if you expected something different".

I decided to focus our work on one aspect of the improvisation – having a clear direction to each phrase. I asked him to improvise on the piece, playing straight eighths instead of swing and focusing on having a direction to the phrase. I asked him to decide where each phrase is starting and where he wants the 'arrival' to be and pointed out to him that in order to succeed he will have to pause his right hand more often both to listen to other layers and to

actually 'arrive' at the intended note. We practiced this over and over on the first 8 bars of the piece and Guy had several very successful executions. Afterward, he commented that these improvisations had sounded completely different than what he had done in his first improvisation of the lesson. One example is transcribed below…

example 1, lesson 34

However, when we continued the exercise to the first 8 bars of the 'B' section of the piece, Guy was unsuccessful. He appeared to have forgotten the main goal of the exercise, playing continuous phrases that did not end on any clearly chosen note. He frequently lost harmonies.

The following week (35), all of the same issues were still present in Guy's improvisation in addition to the fact that he chose to play the piece considerably faster than he had previously (and considerably faster than the original). I had to remind him of everything we had worked on the week before. However, as in the previous several weeks, Guy's presentation of the head was flawless and extremely artistic – his swing feel was elegant, his left hand creatively supporting the melody. In addition, the entire improvisation showed a clear sense of underlying beat as Guy alternately stated and hinted at the 3/4 meter. We had the following conversation…

Judy: You have such a strong sense now of where the beat is without playing it!

Guy: Me?! (laughs). That used to be traumatic for me – where's the beat?!!Judy: Yes, I know. Another thing you're doing great now which also used to be traumatic for you – you're finding a way to move from section to section with the phrase continuing. Remember this? (I play the Exploration in Fourths vamp). That's where we worked on it!Guy: You're right!

I tried to give Guy a mini pep-talk and told him, "In the improvisation I'm still hearing you trying to play like you think a 'jazz player' would play. Now if you want to sound like a traditional jazz player I can tell you what was 'right' and what was 'wrong' with what you just did. I would prefer that you not try to imitate a traditional jazz pianist. I would prefer that you try and find your own sound. That's what we're all about. Try and forget about what you wrote in your arrangement for school. That's gonna be difficult, I know, but I think you can do it."

We slowed the tempo for several more improvisations but this didn't seem to improve any of the issues we were dealing with. At the end of this lesson we jointly decided to put this piece aside. We ended the lesson with the following conversation…

Judy: We still have to straighten out the swing issue. You have it and it popped it's head out here and there in your improvisation here. But, we have to go back to EST.Guy: Ok. I did a lot of new things with this piece that I'd never done before. And I think it moved me forward in many many areas.Judy: Absolutely!

For the following lesson (36) I asked Guy to learn the piece Driftin' (1962) by Herbie Hancock. My rationale for giving Guy this piece, was two-fold. First, I was concerned that the density and complexity of the Kenny Wheeler piece might have been responsible for his inability to transfer the contemporary swing feel he had acquired from work on the EST piece to a more complicated jazz tune. Driftin' is a fairly straight-forward slow to medium tempo bluesy piece in A-B-A form. I believed that Guy would be able to master

the harmony quickly leaving him free to focus on his feel. In addition, the original recording contains a wonderful swing solo by the saxophonist Dexter Gordon which is a gem of laidback feel and I wanted Guy to transcribe and play this solo focusing on this aspect.

As with the Kenny Wheeler piece, Guy excelled quickly at mastering a swing feel on the head of the piece, which he had planned in advance, and in his rendition of the Dexter Gordon solo, which he played along with the recording. However, when it came time to create his own improvisation he reverted back to the traditional swing style that I had heard in the Kenny Wheeler piece. I mentioned to Guy that it appeared to me that his swing fell apart when he started to improvise, when he didn't know what was going to happen. I suggested that instead of playing long complicated phrases to prove that he could navigate the harmonies, he should play 2 notes that have the right feel. I asked Guy to choose an octave within which he would improvise (as we had done many times before - to limit his choices and the chance of being overwhelmed with options, as well as to encourage a more lyrical approach). I had Guy play the head and solo with the recording and then asked him to continue with his own improvisation, hoping that the swing feel he was able to attain in these sections would spill over into his own improvisation. It did not.

(It is interesting to note that throughout these weeks Guy continued to come to each lesson excited about working on these pieces. He expressed great satisfaction with his improvisations. Even as I continually pointed out the problematics of his swing playing Guy's response to his improvisations remained, I like it!)

We continued for several more lesson working on Driftin' and reviewing the EST feel but little progress was made. From week to week Guy's improvisations became more and more complex while less and less swing. When we finally left this topic Guy was able to speak intelligently about the elements that go into playing a swing

feel and to produce these on predetermined melodies and solo but not in his own spontaneous improvisations.

Mindiatyr/ Bobo StensonThe Ultimate Challenge – lessons 27 – 32 (+36)

While still working on swing compositions, we began work on the composition, Mindiatyr, by Swedish jazz pianist Bobo Stenson. This piece is a challenge of immeasurable proportions for the most veteran of improvisers. In the area of rhythm: the piece undulates with a continual poly-rhythm of 3 beats against 4 between left hand and right with shifted metric accents. In the area of harmony: the three harmonic centers of the piece are three remotely related tonalities – F major, Db major, and A major. To complicate matters

even more, in each of the above tonalities the underlying chord of each bar changes with the root of the tonic center providing a pedal point (e.g. in the F major section the chords alternate between F major, F augmented, Bb over F, and Db over F). In the area of melody: the unusual tensions created by the semi-static melody played over constantly changing harmonies challenges the harmonic sensibilities of even the most non-judgmental musical ear. My rationale for giving it to Guy was to both confirm and fortify (1) his rhythmic sense, (2) his ability to hear and create organic improvised phrases that travel through distantly related tonal areas, and (3) to stretch his aural sensibilities regarding appropriate note choice in improvisation.

Guy played the head of the piece for me in lesson 27. Regarding this first performance he commented - "As long as I was calculating, it didn't work. So I said 'O.K. I have to just feel how it feels and then it worked!" Guy expressed considerable surprise at some of Stenson's melody note choices given the harmonic framework of the piece. When I asked him to practice improvising on the piece as homework, Guy asked my advice on how one would go about it. I told him that I would prefer to see what he came up with but that to my mind the central idea would be to "create a thread that weaves through the various chords and section."

In the next lesson (28), Guy was only able to improvise on the first section (F major). One bar after the transition to the Db section he stopped and exclaimed, This is impossible! We discussed developing a palette of notes that could be used in each section rather than shifting gears with each chord change (i.e. every bar). I had asked Guy to listen carefully at home to Bobo Stenson's own improvisation on the piece and this allowed us to begin discussing blue notes which Stenson makes frequent use of in his own palettes. I explained, I'm just going to expose you to them and you can figure out when and if you want to use them. Guy's response was, Do I have to like them?! and he chuckled.

Homework for this week was to devise his own palette of notes as a base for each tonal area.

The following week (lesson 29), Guy's improvisation was still only successful in the first section. For the most part, Guy confused the left hand chord patterns in sections 'B' and 'C' and allowed this to undermine his improvisational line, landing on notes and entire motives that made no musical sense in the context of what he was playing (complete improvisation on audio cd tack XXX).

Guy improvisation on Mindiatyr section 'A' lesson 29

Immediately noticeable is the fact that Guy paused his right hand each time the left hand played its pattern. At those points where he did succeed in playing on top of the left hand pattern (bars 4, 6, 8, 9 – 12) he did so by lining up the rhythm of those phrases with the left hand's rhythmic pattern. Also noticeable is that Guy created a palette of notes that he creatively used over the entire section, creating a melodic thread that weaves through the various chord changes. It was surprising when I realized that this palette was in fact reminiscent of the Arabic hijaz scale – in this context, F, Gb, A, Bb, C, Db, Eb, F. He used a limited number of digressions from this base palette (e.g. D natural in bar 11) which provided a short but refreshing reprieve from the constant modal color.

Two weeks later we returned to Mindiatyr. Eight bars into his improvisation, I stopped Guy and pointed out that he was

continually allowing himself extra beats at the end of bars, almost as if he were playing rubato. Guy had played several interesting phrases but as I explained to him, "You had great ideas but you left them without exploring any of them. You just walked right past them!" Guy laughed. I asked him to try again with the explicit task of playing each new idea twice in a row before moving on (similar to the motivic development exercises we had done with Twins). Despite the fact that he lost the form several times and made several mistakes in the left hand patterns, this next improvisation was the first time that Guy had succeeded in improvising on the entire form of the piece (Appendix I:v).

Guy did, however, have difficulty sticking to the task at hand in subsequent attempts. He often abandoned a motive instantly in favor of some new idea. In response to this I told him, "You found it almost impossible to follow one simple instruction – whatever you play, play it twice. It's like you always think – the next thing is gonna be better. It's not. What you're playing right now is enough!"

For homework I asked Guy to continue to experiment with his choice of palettes for each section, learn the left hand by heart, and remember to keep his improvisations simple for now. In connection to our short conversation regarding being content with what he is playing at any moment, I decided to give Guy a new exercise which I warned him, "will either make you as happy as a Buddha or land you in a loony bin!" The task was to play the left hand part of the piece while simultaneously playing (and singing) only one held note for every four bars. I demonstrated for him and told him that this was one of my personal favorites, that it is designed to relax the player and to open his ears to the sound of two notes playing against each other. We jointly decided to call the exercise Buddha Meditation.

The following week, lesson 32, I decided to focus on a localized difficulty – the sensitive moment when the piece modulates to a new tonality – and the ability to hear and play the lyrical thread

that runs though those moments.The first thing we did was to work on creating an improvised phrase that included the bar immediately preceding the key change and the bar immediately after. Guy would play the piece according to the chart, left hand only, and every time he reached one of those locations he would improvise a 2-bar phrase. This exercise related to the work we had done on Exploration in Fourths and hearing approaching harmonic centers. Below are several sample improvisations that Guy created…

transitional phrase 1

transitional phrase 2

transitional phrase 3

transitional phrase 4

transitional phrase 5

In all of the above examples Guy successfully navigated the transition from the original tonality to the new tonality while creating a fluid melodic line. In each of the examples, Guy did not begin the phrase until after the left hand has finished its pattern but was then able to play through the next bar's left hand pattern with ease. He often made use of the scale of the upcoming tonal center (or its lydian mode) as the basis for his melodic ideas and was even able to develop motives over the transition (e.g. examples 2,4, and 5). He has also finally succeeded in creating rhythmic ideas in his right hand improvisation that work independent of the rhythmic patterns of the left hand, often creating poly-rhythms.

Having been so successful, I then asked Guy to do the same and play the transition motive a second time in the new key center, i.e. in bar 2 of the new section. This proved to be too much of a temptation for Guy and he quickly began creating transition motives considerably longer than 2 bars and impossible to transpose in-total after the modulation. In response, I told Guy that I wanted to do a bit of the Buddha Meditation I had assigned the week before. He immediately admitted to me that he had not done it. I told him that I believed it would be extremely helpful to him if done correctly and consistently. He asked me in a challenging voice, "How will that help me?"

Judy: You said that in the G Song you hear every tension. I want you to reach the same point here. Also I think your ear is rejecting a lot of sounds that you might get used to and like.Guy: But maybe that's what my ear hears.Judy: You're right. That's why I want you to give yourself a chance to explore and expand what your ear hears.Guy: But the harmony of this song is very limiting.Judy: That's what I'm saying. The song isn't limiting'. You're limiting yourself.

I asked Guy to do the 'Buddha' exercise for several minutes. We further clarified it to follow the circle of fifths in the right hand and

I told Guy that the next stage would be to start a motive from each of these 12 notes in each of the 3 sections of the piece.In lesson 33, Guy began the piece at a considerably slower tempo than he had been playing it in previous weeks and was able to improvise through the form several consecutive times (choruses) but this came at the price of playing in a steady tempo and the entire improvisation became a G-Song – like exploration. I put on the metronome to try and stabilize the tempo but then the number of beats per bar fluxuated from 3 to 4 and Guy reverted back to pausing the improvisational phrases each time the left hand needed to play a pattern. I asked Guy to improvise one chorus with the explicit goal of playing while the left hand was changing notes. He was unable to do this, continually confusing the left hand rhythmic pattern. It was, however, obvious from the improvisations that Guy was feeling much more comfortable with the harmonic challenges of this piece and his ability to improvise on it. When I mentioned this to him he told me that he believed it was because this week he had practiced the G-Song in Db and A and I complimented him on that clever initiative.

We had made slow but steady progress on this piece, continuing to isolate the specific issues mentioned above, with the goal of successfully putting it all together. At this point we began a month long vacation from lessons on the other side of which the piece had settled into it's own and the hard – often frustrating – work that we had done over several months of lessons bore fruits.

In the very first lesson after our vacation, Guy played and improvised on Mindiatyr. His improvisation was artistically constructed containing an organic developmental build leading through three choruses to a climax section followed by a coming down to return to the initial melody.

He exhibited total control of all rhythmic elements, including in-time and out-of time, integrating the left hand chord patterns with

ease beneath freely flowing improvisational lines, subtly varying the pattern occasionally to better compliment his right hand ideas. The improvisation was an excellent example of Guy's ability to find the musical thread that weaves through a multitude of harmonic changes. It was also milestone in our work. Guy succeeded in expressing a perfectly organic and idiosyncratic improvisation paying obvious attention to the many skills we had worked on over the many months of lessons. As was often the case with Guy, he had conquered all of the challenges of this piece during a sort of incubation period – a break in the flow of our lessons. Immediately following the improvisation Guy exclaimed, "I really liked that! It's the first time I felt like I really got it – I did it! It wasn't easy!!!!" and he smiled. The improvisation can be found in Appendix I:v.

SalomeThe Process – 9 months

Starting PointLessons 1-6

I met Salome Rabello, a classical pianist originally from Mumbai, India, at the music academy several months after I began my work with Guy. She is studying toward completion of a double major in classical piano and conducting. I chose Salome after interviewing several candidates who expressed interest in participating in my research study.

As with Guy, in our first lesson I asked Salome to play for me a classical composition that she was working on. Her performance exhibited excellent technique and a musical interpretation. I did notice that Salome's hand position was a quite stiff one and made a mental note that this would be one of many central issues to work on in order to develop a contemporary jazz sound. Immediately following, I introduced her to the Shifting Chords exploration.

As I played the alternating chords in a loose rubato tempo I asked Salome to begin to improvise with her right hand. I chose to do this exploration first in a rubato tempo to sidestep the additional pressure of the student having to account for a set number of beats and being 'forced' to relate to each new chord within a given time frame. I would play the first chord and only move to the next when Salome paused her line, so as not to interrupt a musical thought.

At first Salome sat almost frozen and stared at the keyboard. I suggested that she start by playing a single long note followed by another single note and within a few seconds she relaxed and began to play more. As Salome explored sonic possibilities she began to giggle with a childlike joy. Seeing that she was having no difficulty with this, I eventually moved into a steady slow 4/4 tempo. I started to add my own simple riffs, in addition to the chords, to supply a slightly richer musical terrain in which Salome might find additional ideas. Salome immediately picked up on these new musical contributions, was obviously listening to what I was playing, and responded many times in her own musical ideas. We worked as a unit to build the improvisation to a climax and then to bring it to a conclusion (cd track #?).

After we had finished I asked her how she had felt when we were playing without a clear beat. She replied, “It was harder for me. I kept trying to feel a rhythm and create a rhythm instinctively. The second half was easier because I heard where you were going to change the chord. It gave me some kind of structure. And I tried to hear what I wanted to play before I played it – sometimes I missed and sometimes I did get it”. I asked her to try again, this time simultaneously singing what she played, trying to focus on the melodies she is hearing in her head and to making a connection between that inner musical dialogue and what she plays. Salome was perfectly in sync with her voice even on notes outside the chord-scales. She naturally created a central motive of two 16th

notes and an eighth and developed and varied it several times throughout the improvisation.

In our discussion afterwards, I asked her if she had noticed that she had several times run out of breath while singing. She laughed and said that she had. I suggested to her that this was perhaps an indication that the phrases needed to breathe as well. We had the following conversation…

Judy: What did you like about what you just did?Salome: I'm happy to see that I could do that and it wasn't that hard!Judy: And your hands were actually following what your voice was singing!Salome: Yah, that's surprising! (she laughs)Judy: Not to me, it's not.Salome: I noticed that when I consciously focused on hearing the melodies first in my head it was much better, not just like going along with my fingers.Judy: Were there things that you didn't like about it?Salome: Well, sometimes I felt like I was just rambling. But that was also nice cause I was just happy that I could find notes that I was hearing in my head!Judy: Well, rambling is the place to start.

We spoke about the fact that all of the basic things she knows from studying classical music - dynamics, shaping a phrase, articulation, etc. - are tools she must learn to use when creating an improvisation. I asked her to do this exploration at home playing the chords herself both in tempo and rubato. I also gave her two compositions by Norwegian jazz pianist, Tord Gustavsen – Tears Transforming and The Ground – to learn and improvise on at home.

The following week we began the lesson with the two chord exploration in a rubato tempo, playing and singing, with Salome providing the chords herself. I immediately noticed that she was spending a lot of mental energy searching for the notes she was singing – if she played the wrong note she would interrupt the flow of the improvisation and search for the note she had originally sung. I explained to her that the voice is meant to be a guide and not a dictator and that if some notes don't match but the overall flow, direction, and intent of the phrase is present she should view this as a success.

I decided to ask her to do the next improvisation still in a rubato tempo but without singing, to get warmed up. She was quite successful and again, revealed her enjoyment by giggling when, for example, she apparently surprised herself by playing a Bb over the C major 7 chord. She consistently held notes over from one chord to next and it was visibly apparent that she was listening to how the note rings differently from chord to chord. She did however consistently pause her right hand when she needed to change the left hand chord creating a series of one-bar motives. I next asked Salome to play the exploration in a set tempo. Here she was able to play through the chord changes creating longer phrases.

We did one more improvisation on this exploration with Salome singing. Salome was much more at ease this time regarding the connection between her voice and her fingers and allowed her voice to be merely a guide. A minute and a half into the improvisation (bar 25) I asked her to stop singing. An analysis of the improvisation can be found in appendix I:vi.

Next we turned to Tears Transforming, one of the compositions that I had given her at the last lesson. Salome would first play the melody and then during her improvisation I would accompany her with a simple left hand pattern. Each time that the improvisational cycle arrived at bars 11 -16 (key change) Salome would play the original melody.

The first few tries, Salome was unable to recognize our arrival at the key change. I suggested that she try to keep the melody playing in her head as she improvised. Her next attempt was a great success (Appendix I:vi).

We next tried one improvisation with Salome playing the left hand pattern herself. She did quite well though her melodic ideas were considerably simpler than in the previous improvisation. Once, she missed the arrival of the key change and immediately stopped

herself and corrected the mistake. This told me that she was successfully audiating the melody in her head as she improvised. I asked her to continue this for homework.

In lesson 3 we continued to build on the ability to feel the underlying beat but detach from it with out of time playing which would be a central element in Salome's future improvisational abilities. We used both the Shifting Chords exploration and the G-Song as a base for this work. Salome shared the fact that she found improvising in a rubato feel quite difficult - "I don't know where to take it or how to think about what to do. And I find myself not creating nice phrases and just rambling a lot. And once I put it into a set tempo it's much easier." And when I asked her to begin the two-chord exploration with out of time playing she actually played rhythmically in time with a beat. I mentioned this to her and demonstrated the different sound of each. Afterward we discussed this…

Judy: What was the difference?Salome: The second was more flowing.Judy: What do you mean?Salome: I don't know it's hard to describe. Tell me.Judy: In the first one I was clearly hearing and feeling a pulse. It's not 4 beats per bar but I'm hearing a pulse.Salome: Yah, that's true.Judy: In the second one, I'm completely detached from pulse, any pulse.Salome: Yah, that's true. I am hearing a pulse when I play!Judy: That's why I think you're getting "stuck" all the time, like you said. Because you're feeling a pulse. Now I never told you not to and it's very interesting to me that that's how you relate to it. They're two different ways of relating to time in improvising. In jazz they call it in-time and out-of-time. These two ways of doing this exploration are designed to work on these two ways of feeling the time. Eventually when you want to improvise on a piece, that piece will have a beat. But if you're always improvising inside that beat the improvisation can get tedious. You want to be able to develop the ability to know that the beat is there but detach from it. The starting place is a simple exercise like this.

Salome tried again and was more successful.

We then turned to Tears Transforming. This week Salome was to improvise and accompany herself with the left hand pattern. She played though the chord changes well and consistently arrived at the key change and played the original melody as last week. She did, however, naturally gravitate to using the sustain pedal throughout which distorted much of her melodic lines. The improvisation was understandably simpler than the previous week as Salome worked to keep both hands moving in sync. Her phrases were confined basically to a C lydian and I did not hear any of the experimentation with the use of D# that had been apparent in the previous lesson's improvisation.

I mentioned the issue of the D# to Salome and in her next attempt she made frequent use of the D# note in a variety of musical ways. She also took her foot off the sustain pedal without my having said anything. For homework, I asked her to continue exploring her palette options.

At the start of lesson 4 Salome asked if we could start with the two-chord exploration out-of-time. She was quite successful, though her improvisational lines were quite simple. I decided to play the chords myself and as Salome improvised to call out a switch in time feel from in-time to out-of-time and back. She succeeded beautifully. I then decided to try the technique on Tears Transforming. I asked her to use out of time playing twice in her improvisation, but once she was stuck in-time she was unable to break free and play out. I asked her to play two full choruses of out of time improvisation. This was much easier for her.

Whereas with Guy by lesson 5 we had begun working on repertoire and original compositions, I had concluded based on my work with him, that it would be advantageous to the student of improvisation to continue this initial skills- building stage using simple explorations for a bit longer than 4 weeks. As a result, Salome and I spent an additional 3 weeks continuing to build a base of musical habits such as (1) in time and out of time playing, (2) feeling the

beat, (3) building improvisational lines that span multiple chords, and (4) motive development. We expanded the Shifting Chords exploration to include two pairs of alternating chords. This challenged Salome to hear ever longer lyrical connections between disparate chords and within two lessons she was navigating the changes successfully and creatively. She continued to be challenged by her attempts to smoothly transition between in time and out of time playing. In one particular lesson, as she improvised on Shifting Chords, she spontaneously began singing in the middle of her improvisation. When I asked her why she had done this she replied that "it helps me to make sure that I'm in the time feel I intended." I was thrilled that she had made that connection by herself.

In lesson 6, as Salome improvised on Tears Transforming, I heard a high level synthesis of various elements that we had been working on in the past 6 weeks. Salome created lyrical lines that connected the chord changes, asymmetrical phrases longer than 2 bars, repeated and developed motives, and freely used in time and out of time playing. We had begun working on motive development in lesson 5 using another Tord Gustavsen piece, The Ground. Salome had found this very difficult until the present lesson, yet of her own initiative uses the technique in her improvisation here on Tears Transforming (Appendix I:vi).

The Melody Hidden in the OctaveFocus on Lyricism - I Would've Called Her Sam – Lesson 7-12

In the next six lessons we focused on honing the skills that Salome had acquired in her work on the basic explorations and using them while improvising on more complex repertoire pieces. In the previous six lessons, Salome had (1) begun to hear and create longer phrases, (2) developed a basic ability to create improvisational lines that overlapped simple chord changes. (3) begun to develop the ability to hear and respond to the emergent qualities of her improvisations as exhibited in motivic development, and (4) exhibited control in both in-time playing and out-of-time playing. In addition, she had begun to expand her improvisational palette beyond basic diatonic scales through exploration with alternative scales and tensions.

In lesson 7, Salome brought her first original composition, Maybe Not (appendix #X). She explained that she had never before attempted to compose a piece of music. This composition (which will be discussed at length in chapter X, The Use of Original Compositions as Referents) was clearly an expansion of the Shifting Chords exploration that we had spent six weeks on. The harmonic progressions are all built on pairs of 7th chords that sit one tone apart – Bbmaj + Cmaj7; Cmaj7 + Dmi7; Ebmaj7 + Fmaj7. I was pleased that Salome had chosen this (perhaps unconsciously) as the basis of her first piece as it allowed us to make the initial bridge, using already familiar material, from a semi-meandering,

exploratory type of improvisation to the creation of an organic improvisation that encompasses an entire piece. We began to discuss the musical elements that aid the performer in building an improvisation – dynamics, texture, rhythmic feel, etc. It also allowed us to begin discussing the role of the left hand in improvisation.

In her first improvisation on this piece (lesson 10), Salome reverted back a bit to her 2 bar phrasing.. She instinctively used the rhythmic motives of the melody throughout the improvisation which allowed her to create a sense of organic unity. By the end of our work on this piece (lesson 11) Salome could move through the changes by heart allowing her to create considerably longer lines of improvised ideas. She frequently quoted or alluded to melodic motives of the piece as well as rhythmic motives.

We had focused much attention to motive development as a way to create organic unity in an improvisation using Shifting Chords and the G-Song and we continued to work on this with the piece, The Ground by Tord Gustavsen. The Ground is a ballad with chord changes as often as twice in one bar. I chose to work on motivic development with this piece as I felt it would be an excellent challenge in hearing connections between harmonies. After Salome had learned to play the piece (lesson 8) I asked her to compose several short motives based on the first bar. We then practiced improvising by moving the motive from bar to bar, adjusting for harmonic changes and finding musical ways to state the motive in the new terrain. The first time we tried this Salome found it extremely difficult, but after going home and practicing she came back the following week and was very successful with a number of original planned motives.

At first the task was to play only the actual motive, once in each bar, but I quickly expanded the task to include creating variations of the motive as well as integrating the motive inside more extended improvisational lines. Salome had no trouble with this

and even quoted the original melody of a particular bar at one point, interweaving this seamlessly into her own improvisation.( track #?). In following weeks we increased the challenge by working with Salome's spontaneously created motives as the basis of the improvisation.

To this point Salome had developed the skills to connect two chords with a continuous improvisational phrase (Shifting Chords, Tears Transforming). She had also developed the skill to hear a distinct musical element (motive) in a variety of harmonic centers (The Ground).I planned to give Salome my original composition, I Would've Called Her Sam, that I had worked on with Guy. With Guy this had proven a fertile learning ground for developing the ability to create improvisational threads that weave through a variety of changing harmonies. In preparation for this new challenge we returned for one lesson to Shifting Chords which we had left several weeks before. I asked Salome play the exploration using two pairs of chords (as we had in lesson 5) and reminded her that her task was to create improvisational lines that overlap the transition moments to a new chord.

Salome 4 chord 'Shifting Chord' improvisationIn this improvisation Salome succeeded beautifully in creating improvisational lines that connect through the various chord changes. At the outset (first 6 bars) she achieves this by holding the

last note of one bar through the beginning of the subsequent bar but by bar 7 she begins to creatively weave her musical ideas over the barlines and transition organically to new tonalities. Salome develops melodic and rhythmic motives (bars 1-2; 8-10; and 15-16) and creates interesting rhythmic-melodic sequences (bars7-8). She freely uses a variety of modes organically interwoven into her melodic lines (incl. E major, E Mixolydian, E Dorian, D major, D Lydian, A major, and A Mixolydian).

Salome also giggled three times during this improvisation. We have already mentioned Salome's giggling as a signal of surprise/delight on her part. Here she expressed that surprise first in bar #1 on the first note - D natural over the E major 7 chord (actually a blue note, though Salome had not yet been introduced to that concept). Her response to this unusual non-diatonic sound was to immediately play it again in the same bar, incorporating it as an integral element of the phrase. The second time she giggled was in bar 9 as she played the D# - the major 7th of the E major 7 chord. The strong 'G' orientation of the bar preceding gives the tension of this note an almost residual stress and perhaps this is what delighted Salome. The third time that she giggled was again an instance of landing on a blue note in bar 17. Here again she immediately replays theunusual note, incorporating it into the phrase as a central element, and continues to stress it in the next bar as well.

All of the skills which were apparent in Salome's improvisation on the 4-chord version of Shifting Chords we would now work toward utilizing in the considerably more complex piece, I Would've Called Her Sam.

Salome first improvised on Sam in lesson 10, one week after I had given her the piece to learn. Before she began, we worked out chord inversions for the improvisational section that would allow her to change the left hand chords with a minimal of focused attention, leaving her free to concentrate on her improvisation. Just

before she began to play Salome asked me, "Do I have to change with every chord, according to the scale or according to the chord?" I replied, "I'm not going to answer that. What I want you to do is listen to your ear and let your ear help you navigate these 12 tones (I point to the octave on the piano) and build melodic ideas that move through the section."

I asked her to play the improvisation in a rubato style so that she wouldn't be stressed by keeping to a beat. There were frequent long pauses as Salome navigated the chord changes with her left hand. She kept the improvisation simple and paused her right hand line every time she needed to play a new left hand chord. She stopped after the first 8 bar cycle and I complimented her and asked her to try another one, transcribed below…

Salome improvisation #1 on Sam

I again complimented her and pointed out that she was using a majority of chord tones in her improvisation and asked her to try and listen for more lyrical lines that might connect between chords. I also asked her to consciously play a right hand note with every chord change in the left hand. Though I realized that this would most likely give the improvisation a mechanical sound by always emphasizing the first beat of the bar, I wanted her to begin to grapple with the mental and physical coordination required to do this.

Salome Improvisation #2 on Sam

Salome immediately made the requested adjustment and here plays lyrical lines that attempt to move through the chord changes. She successfully achieves the coordination necessary to play in both hand simultaneously at the moment of chord changes. Her emphasis of chord tones, when they do appear, come as an integral part of the improvisational line and not an outline of the appropriate chord. She did, however, get confused with the chords of the last two bars and stopped.

For homework, I had asked Salome to confine herself to one octave – C to C - in hopes that this would help her to hear the lyrical connections between the chords and focus her ideas even more. The next week she played the following improvisation on the piece…

Salome improvisation #3 on Sam

What is immediately striking about this improvisation is Salome's use of 'space' – pauses between the end of one idea and the beginning of the next. From these pauses it is possible to conclude that Salome has begun to hear both the approaching harmonic

changes as well the transition of each lyrical lines as it arrives at that change (virtually every bar ends with pickup notes directionally leading into the new harmonic center). She is able to refer back to an already played musical element and use it to construct a subsequent melodic idea (bars 2 - 4). I did not indicate before she began whether she should play the improvisation rubato or in tempo and Salome instinctively began this improvisation in a slow but groove-based tempo. Her use of intricate and varied rhythmic ideas also considerably surpasses that of the previous lesson. For homework I asked Salome to continue to practice improvisation inside an octave but to choose a new octave frame each time she played the piece. This moving around of the improvisational frame would continually encourage new melodic constructions as Salome was forced to adjust to new tone relations and shifting directionality of musical lines imposed by each octaves restrictions.

In the following lesson I had Salome play the improvisation with a metronome. This final restriction of time limitation would prove Salome's ability to account for all elements of the underlying referent in her improvisation.

Salome improvisation #4 on SamAgain Salome makes excellent use of space, as discussed in the previous sample. She transitions into the upcoming harmony in a variety of ways: (1) by using pickup notes (bars 2 and 4); (2) through a smooth continuation of the melodic line (bars 3, 4, 6, and 8); or (3) through the use of suspensions (bars 2, 3, and). As opposed to the previous improvisations on this piece, here Salome

freely creates asymmetrical phrases (bar 1; bars 2-4). She develops motives (bars 2-4) and uses repetition of a motive in different harmonic settings (bar 5), reminiscent of the work we did on The Ground.

Exploration in FourthsLessons 15-18

Salome had made excellent (and swift) progress at being able to achieve fluidity of improvisation on chord transitions at a slow speed. Being able to do so in faster tempos would bring new challenges. At the end of lesson 15, I introduced Salome to Exploration in Fourths. I played her a short example of how it works and asked her to try it at home over the course of the next week.

When Salome arrived at her next lesson, I asked her to tell me which assignments had been particularly difficult or easy, frustrating or exciting, for her this past week. She replied, "Everything we did this week was HARD!" I asked her what specifically had been hard about it, to which she replied, "EVERYTHING!" (She giggled), especially the exploration in fourths!"

We tried an initial go at it. Interestingly, Salome played the rhythm in swing time. I stopped her and pointed this out and told her that it was meant to be played in straight eighth notes, as I had done the week before. Her response was, "It's harder not in swing." and in fact in her next attempt using straight eighth notes she could not find the end of the 4 bar cycle. I decided to work only on the 'F' tonality, in order to temporarily suspend some of the harmonic challenges of the exploration, and to give her a verbal "four" each time she reached the end of a cycle.

Salome Exploration in Fourths – lesson 16, example 1

After several more cycles I stopped giving the cue and Salome continued on without my help.

Salome Exploration in Fourths – lesson 16, example 2

I mentioned to Salome that she had used almost exclusively F major and F pentatonic and pointed out to her that I had noticed from the beginning that she appeared to have a strong affinity for pentatonic scales and that I guessed it was from her upbringing in

India and being exposed to non-western sounds. She surprised me by answering, "The area I grew up in is very westernized. I went to an English school. We learned English songs in kindergarten. I only got exposed to Indian culture when I got to university." I asked her to explore other 'F' possibilities in her next improvisation. This improvisation took on an exploratory sound, with disconnected musical ideas, as Salome explored as I had asked her to. At one point in the improvisation Salome missed the end of the 4 bar cycle and continued on in the 'F' tonality without switching to 'D'. She immediately yelled out, "MISSED IT!" I was very happy to see that Salome was feeling the cycle so integrally.

With the rhythmic aspect of the exploration sufficiently under her belt, I asked Salome to now try and find a transition note to bridge between the two tonalities – a note that would finish her phrase in one tonality and land on the first beat of the new tonality .We did some work first in sections to make sure that Salome was secure in each tonal area –an extended 'F' section, then an extended 'D' section. Salome appeared to be comfortable in each of the tonalities separately. At one point, in the middle of a phrase in D major she landed on an 'f natural'. As she continued to play, I heard her say under her breath, “It was a mistake." When she had finished I reminded her of this, told her I had heard it and explained, "It wasn't a 'mistake' it was just unexpected. It's an unexpected opportunity", I replied. "Yah, right", she laughed. Tell that to my classical teacher!"

With both pieces of the puzzle securely in place, we went back to the original form and put the two sections together with the explicit goal of finding one transition note. Salome still found this quite difficult, so we worked only on the moment of transition, playing continuous cycles of 4 bars in 'F' going to four bars in 'D'. This appeared to be very helpful to Salome and we quickly went back to the original form and Salome performed her first full improvisation on this exploration (Appendix I:vii). Salome was successful throughout in feeling the 4-bar cycles and finding a transition note

to each new tonality. She did however, find it difficult this time to know when she had reached the moment of transition and I began to give her a verbal cue. At the end of this last improvisation Salome exclaimed, "IT'S SO FUN!" I reminded her of her statement about the exploration at the beginning of the lesson and she laughed.

A week later (lesson 17) Salome had no trouble playing the exploration, feeling the cycle and transition moment, and bridging the two tonalities with one note. I did notice that she was consistently ending her improvisational phrases on top of the next left hand pattern. I complimented her on that initiative and ability but explained to her that the original 'rule' was to finish each improvisation before the left hand entered again. This, I explained, would encourage her focus on musically ending each phrase rather than either cutting the phrase in mid-though or rambling. She told me that she was aware that she was doing this but that it was hard not to.

For the next improvisation, I asked her to not only find a transitional note but to continue only the last improvised phrase of each tonality and end it in the new key. As Salome approached the transition moment, I could visually see the intense focus on her face. She succeeded admirably but immediately stopped and exclaimed, "THAT"S HARD!" Immediately, Salome suggested that we do some work on this the way we had in the previous lesson – playing only the last phrase of one tonality leading into the first phrase of the new tonality. I was thrilled that Salome was able to make these personal connections in our work process, know what had helped her before and how it might help her in a new situation. I told her that I thought this was a great idea.

We worked as Salome had requested and she did in fact succeed several time in a row. However, that success came encouraged by the fact that she mirrored the left hand chord rhythm in her phrase endings…

Transition bar, example 1

Transition bar, example 2

I asked her to continue and she herself said, "But I'm using only the left hand rhythm." I told Salome how excited I was that she was hearing these things as she played and told her that for now it was important first to get comfortable with the coordination of the two hands and that we should continue. Despite what I had said, Salome took the initiative to try and improve the issue herself. The following are her next few attempts…

Transition bar, example 3

Transition bar, example 4

Transition bar, example 5

Transition bar, example 6

Salome had succeeded so well, that we returned to the original form of the exploration (4 X 4 bars in 'F' and 4 X 4 bars in 'D'). She succeeded in consistently playing through the transition moments into the new tonality but only by mirroring the left hand pattern.As she finished the exploration Salome said, "That was fun! I like this!" As we finished our work in that lesson, I pointed out to Salome that the majority of her phrases began at the same location in the bar. I asked her to work on this as well as the transitional lines for her next lesson.

We began the next lesson (18) with Exploration in Fourths. Salome chose to play it at an unusually fast tempo. Perhaps as a result, many of her rhythmic ideas were imprecise. She succeeded in navigating the form as well as the transition moments, but all of her transitional phrase endings mirrored the left hand chord rhythm as they had in the previous lesson. However, Salome did something intuitively which was extremely musical – she began foreshadowing the moment of transition by shifting to the new

mode several beats before the actual key change. I pointed this out to her, and complimented her on the achievement that it implied.

I pointed out to Salome the issues mentioned above and asked her to play it again considerably slower. The next improvisation began much as the same, with Salome mirroring the chord rhythm in order to succeed in playing through the transition moment. In the first few successive cycles she was able to break out of the rhythmic pattern with one extra note. Then, suddenly she produced the following…

Salome transition phrase example 1

Salome continued to use the same rhythmic construct to successfully bridge the transition four more time. Below are two examples.

Salome Transition phrase example 2

Salome Transition phrase example 3

In the fifth cycle she broke from this new comfort zone.

Salome Transition phrase example 4

I told Salome how excited I was at her rapid progress with this extremely difficult exploration. I suggested that this week she practice playing over the chords – isolating the bar of left hand – and becoming comfortable with breaking the rhythm in her improvisational lines.

From this point Salome made excellent progress and we stayed with this exploration for only several more weeks. We did come back to it in the first lesson after the 3 month summer break (lesson 31) this time with two new pairs of chords. Her improvisation from that lesson can be heard on track ?.

Bugge Wesseltoft: Organic Unity part I - Song & SoloLessons 21 - 24

In lesson 17 I gave Salome a new repertoire piece, In Dulce Jubilo, performed by Norwegian jazz pianist, Bugge (pronounced like 'boogie') Wesseltoft. The piece is a traditional Christmas hymn and our referent was a solo piano cover version by this pianist. I asked

Salome to begin by transcribing Wesseltoft's arrangement of the hymn and to make note of the harmonies and form that he used for his improvisational section. Salome transcribed the arrangement and played it for me in lesson 18. I asked her to begin working on the improvisation section at home.

We didn't begin work on the piece until lesson 21, as Salome had brought a new original composition in lesson 20 which was the focus of our attention for two weeks. We listened together to the recording to see exactly what left hand pattern Bugge was using…

Bugge left hand pattern #1

Bugge left hand pattern #2

Salome began to play the pattern and after 4 cycles, while still playing, turned to me and laughed, "Now what do I do?!" I answered, "Pretend it's the G Song". This first improvisation on the solo section of the piece was simple but successful. Salome had no problems with the rhythmic coordination of the improvisation. She did, however, remain almost exclusively within pentatonic scales. From this lesson through to lesson 24 (where she performed a complete rendition of the song in the form of with melody –improvisation – melody) she continually expanded her melodic palette to include a variety of modes and poly-harmonies and came closer to creating an improvisation which exhibited an organic unity of ideas. Improvisations from lessons 21, 22, and 24 can be found in Appendix I:viii.

Twins: Organic Unity part II - Disparate SectionsLessons 27 – 29

To this point all of our improvisational referents, whether compositions or explorations, had been referents built around one underlying concept, mood, and harmonic center - Tears Transforming had been built on one mode; I Would Have Called Her Sam was a basic 2-chord per bar ballad style, a short eight bar solo section. Likewise, The Ground, though considerably longer, was composed in a straight ballad style with one underlying harmonic center from beginning to end. Salome's two original compositions to this point had fit into this definition as well. With our work on Twins we would begin to tackle the demands of improvising on a composition with disparate sections, each with a distinct musical personality and harmonic style, and the challenge this brought of creating a coherent and organic solo.

Salome first played Twins in lesson 27. After a successful rendition of the melody I asked her to try and improvise one chorus. Upon beginning, she immediately lost the form and stopped. She tried several more times but was not successful in this lesson in navigating the harmonies and form. We talked a bit about the three distinct sections in each half of the piece and I suggested that in her work at home she isolate the various section, practicing the improvisation on each in loops.

The following week we had devoted the lesson completely to two of Salome's original compositions. We next worked on Twins in lesson 29. We began by practicing the way that I had asked her to for the lesson – improvising on each section in a loop. We divided the composition further by isolating a particularly tricky location in bars 6-8 and 22-24. At those two locations in the piece there is an unusual chord – dominant7#9 – and I decided that it would be helpful to focus a bit on this as well.

Salome had mentioned at the outset of the lesson that she found the Eb pedal-point section particularly difficult so we started with the two pedal point sections – one in F and one in Eb. Salome in fact had no trouble in either. From here we moved on to the first six bars of each half (C minor to Ab in the first half and Bb minor to Gb in the second). Here, again, she was successful. We then turned our attention to bars 6-8 and the D7#9 chord. Salome improvised on these 3 bars in a loop…

phrase 1

phrase 2

phrase 3

phrase 4

In the first two phrases Salome used only chord tones on the D7#9 chord. In phrase 3 she began to create a more lyrically based phrase and inserted several up-beats. In her last phrase she began to experiment with alternative scale choices. When she had finished she told me that at home she had discovered that she particularly liked using an Ab major scale over this chord and we discussed a bit the relationship between those note choicesand the tensions that they create on the dominant chord.

Salome had been quite successful in work on isolated sections of the piece and so I asked her to put two sections together and improvise (again in a loop) on the first eight bars. This would combine the modal style of the first five bars with the cadence of D7#9 to G suspended. Though at first, she paused the right hand with each chord change, Salome was quickly able to play through chord changes, creating organic musical ideas that encompassed both sections and even connected one loop to the next (Appendix I:ix).

When we stopped Salome exclaimed, "Yay! I did it! I can play!" "Of course you can play!" I said. She answered, "Yah, but some days it all comes out like crap. I sit down to improvise and it all sounds like crap". "And so what do you do then?" I asked her. "I give up (she giggles). Or sometimes I just keep playing and feeling bad". I made the following suggestion – "When it sounds like crap go back to playing just one note – even for several bars. (I demonstrate) Wasn't that beautiful? And it's not cause I'm a genius! I let that note have it's moment and then it inspired me to add another and then another and before you know it you're improvising again!"

In lesson 30 Salome improvised for the first time on the entire form of the composition. The improvisation exhibited a wide variety of rhythmic ideas and excellent use of space. It was apparent that she had related to each of the three distinct sections with a unique

approach as we had discussed in the lessons (Appendix I:ix). This marked the end of our work on this piece.

Learning to Swing: Daydream; The Message; Driftin'Lessons 30 - 31

In our last two lessons, we began to work on swing. In fact, with Salome this investigation of swing feel had begun months before in

lesson 12 when she brought her original composition, Daydream.

That composition, Salome's second, was written in a swing style.

Though I had originally planned on introducing the concept of swing toward the end of our learning process, this piece prompted me to give Salome a small taste of this technique much earlier. In lesson 13 and 14 we talked about the 'feel' of a jazz melody and how to comp with left by placing chords simultaneously with crucial syncopations with the melody. We also talked a little about jazz feel, nonlegato articulation, and using less pedal. I also reminded Salome of when I had made sit on the floor to play the G Song and the hand position that this had encouraged (as opposed to a rigid classical hand position). We spent a considerable amount of time in these lesson working on the left hand's role in the creation of a swing feel – playing the chords off the beat, accenting the right hand kicks, and constructing chord voicings that include notes other than the triad. As homework for lesson 15, I asked Salome to try and improvise on the piece at home.

In Salome's first improvisations on the piece (lesson 15) there were two key obstacles. First, in the lines of continuous ii – v – I progressions, the chords were changing very rapidly and she was unable to successfully change chords in her left hand while improvising in her right, and second, she used the sustain pedal throughout her improvisations, making a swing articulation virtually impossible. (She said afterward, that she had not even been aware that she was using it!) After a few attempts I asked her to take her foot off the pedal. I also suggested that we isolate the first line of ii – V - I progressions and work only on that location.

Salome first improvisation on ii – V – I progressions in Daydream, lesson 15

It is evident from this initial improvisation that Salome possesses a natural sense of several key elements of swing playing. For example, all of her short motives (except one in bar 2) end on a syncopation. Also, her phrases are made up of a majority of eighth note patterns. Both of these are central to creating an authentic swing feel. Despite the fact that the range of this improvisation was only a sixth, I asked Salome to restrict herself to a specific chosen octave for her next improvisation with the goal of consciously focusing her attention on the lyrical possibilities of this short 8 bar section.

Salome first improvisation on ii – V – I progressions in Daydream, lesson 15

Salome's phrases became more distinct units as she made use of space and even created an interesting asymmetrical phrase that connects two distinct ii –V – I units (bars 3 -6). In this example she consistently used the last note of each phrase as the first note of the next creating several interesting tensions.

We worked a bit more on this section of the piece the following week. Salome's skills expanded and she began to anticipate harmonic changes (bar 2) and to make use of poly-chord harmony (bars 3-4, Eb major over the Ab major 7 chord).

Salome improvisation on ii – V – I progressions in Daydream, lesson 16.

In this lesson Salome attempted to improvise an entire chorus but was unsuccessful. I decided to move on to other material and return to the issue of swing playing several months from now, at the end of the process. This happened in lessons 31 and 32.

As with Guy, I gave Salome the assignment of learning to play The Message by EST. Salome inherited Guy's transcription to work off of. I had asked her to try and learn to play each phrase with the same feel that the pianist, Esbjorn Svensson, was using. As we began, Salome told me that she had decided that it would be helpful to practice the piece along with the recording and had done just that. I complimented her on that initiative and told her that she had guessed what I was going to ask her to do in lesson. With the recording playing in the background, Salome gave it her first try. Though she had a number of phrases perfectly executed, the majority of her playing was in an old school swing style, quite remote from the way that Svensson was playing.

I decided to demonstrate for her the swing feel that we were after and her own swing playing and asked her to tell me if she heard a difference. I began by imitating her playing and before I had even stopped she said "ok I hear what you mean". I asked her to explain. "I'm playing it like a dotted eighth and sixteenth. That's not the way he's playing it," she replied. "You're right," I said, "He's playing almost straight eighth notes." I explained to her that there are a number of critical elements in this pianist's playing that all

contribute to the swing feel and that we would tackle them one at a time. First, we talked a bit about the importance of a non legato articulation. I asked her to play the piece again, playing straight eighth notes and focusing on this articulation.

When she had finished I asked her if she had noticed that this time her notes were basically sitting on top of Svensson's notes, almost simultaneous with them, and she said that she had.

Next we spoke about the unique accent sequence of swing feel – a slight accent placed on the second of each two eighth notes. I asked her to play a scale using straight eighth notes but to try and gently accent – "lean into" – the even number notes (2, 4, 6, etc). Salome was extremely successful with this task on the first try. I asked her to try and improvise some short phrases over the recording, using that same feel. Before I had pushed 'play' Salome asked, "Like he does here" and pointed to a specific phrase in the transcription. She then proceeded to demonstrate the phrase for me with perfect swing articulation. "Just like that!" I smiled.

However, when I turned on the recording and Salome began to play, she transformed all of Svensson's eighth note lines into loose quarter note triplets. I began to recite the proper feel for her – "da –da –da- da" - but this didn't seem to help. When we stopped she said, "It's so hard! It's kind of Reggae!" I asked her to keep working like this at home, playing both the transcription and improvising her own short phrases. I also gave her the piece, Driftin' by Herbie Hancock and Guy's transcription of 32 bars of Dexter Gordon's solo on that piece. I asked her to work only the right hand melody in the tune and to learn as much as she could of the solo, paying attention to imitating Gordon's feel as she played it.

We began Salome's next lesson with The Message. I asked Salome to play the original melody and transcribed solo with the recording. All of Salome's eighth note phrases this

time were played in an exaggerated laid-back feel, sounding more like quarter-note triplets than eighth note swing. I decided to work on the swing feel in a simpler context – 12 bar blues.

I explained to Salome I was going to accompany her with a 12 bar blues harmony in G (the same key as The Message) and that she should continue improvising and focusing on creating phrases with the swing elements we had worked on in the previous lesson.

As Salome began, she immediately reverted back to the old school swing that she had initially played for me in our first lesson on swing – dotted eighth + sixteenth pattern. I immediately stopped and before I even told her this, she smiled and told me that she had heard just that. We started again. Salome played two choruses of blues in G with an almost perfectly executed swing feel.

Salome improvisation on blues in G, lesson 32

Salome instinctively employed several techniques which contributed to this almost perfect execution of swing feel: (1) she consistently created phrases that ended on the off beat, (2) she alternated quarter notes and eighth notes in her phrases, (3) she kept her phrases short, and (3) she made excellent use of space between phrases. She also instinctively used G mixolydian mode as her melodic base. When we stopped Salome said, "That was much easier for me!

We turned next to Driftin' and Dexter Gordon's solo. Salome explained to me that she had only been able to learn the first 8 bars of the solo. She said she had found it extremely difficult to pick up on Gordon's timing and commented that it might have been easier if she herself had done the transcription. In that case, she explained, she would have gotten a deeper understanding of Gordon's improvisation. I complimented her on this insight and told her that I agreed. I asked her to played the right hand melody of the tune with recording plus 8 bars of the solo.

Salome had no problem with the melody of the piece but, as she played the 8 bars of the solo, again, her laid-back feel was exaggerated and considerably behind Gordon's own phrasing. We practiced the first 4 bars of the solo in a loop with me playing roots. Gradually, Salome's playing began to more closely resemble the original solo's feel.I explained to Salome that a combination of Svensson's feel and Dexter's feel would create her contemporary swing feel. Then put recording back on and she performed the solo perfectly.

We now went back to the blues and I asked Salome to try and combine the elements we had worked on in Svensson's playing and Gordon's playing in her own improvisational phrases. I chose the key of F major and as I counted off, before beginning, I said, "Ready?" She laughed, "No!" And we were off (Appenidx I:x; audio track X).

The G Song: A Musical Sandbox

As with many of the assignments I gave Guy, the G-Song was discovered by a process similar to improvisation. I was searching for a minimal structure that would allow for a wide-open harmonic field in which the student could explore and experiment, while providing an unobtrusive yet steady pulse. My hands literally landed on this pattern. I played with it for a while and decided that not only did it answer all the requirements but also created a sonic texture which could encourage divergent hearing. What I did not envision was the central role that it would play throughout the learning process. Initially I had intended it as an entrance into the world of improvisation, to be experienced and then moved beyond. What it, in fact, became was the initial experimental zone for every musical concept and technique that we would explore. Through the G-Song we would explore, among others, phrasing and motive development, rhythmic constructions, the form of an extended improvisation, and changing harmonic landscapes. Each basic new challenge found success first in the G-Song and then was applied to more complex compositions. As we moved the G Song around the piano, transposing it to new tonal locations, the student would rediscover, if you will, the harmonic and melodic possibilities inherent across the keyboard, this time as personal idiosyncratic choices in improvisation. In addition, this exploration would become a place the students would choose to return to again and

again in order to meditate, experiment and explore beyond the lessons, to center themselves when facing particularly challenging assignments, to search for their personal voice. For reasons that I cannot explain, they would come to view the G-Song as a barometer of their creative development and the standard against which they would measure their achievements in other challenges undertaken in our time together.

It is my opinion that the G-Song comes creates an optimal environment in which the student may play - a musical sandbox, with an abundance of possibilities for imaginative expression. In his magnum opus on play and it's role in the development of civilization, Huizinga writes that the characteristics of play are as follows: (1) it is free, (2) it is disinterested – it steps out of "real" life into a temporary sphere of activity with a disposition all of its own, (3) it is secluded and limited – it is "played out" within certain limits of time and place. It defines its own course and meaning, and (4) it creates order – it exists within a playground marked off beforehand and inside that play-ground an absolute and distinctive order reigns. "Play casts a spell over us ; it is enchanting, captivating." (Huizinga, 1949).

The role of play in learning has been well documented by leading researchers. Russ (2004) described the causal relationship between play and creativity, specifically in the ability to generate insights and to engage in divergent thinking. In play, children and adults experience a holistic integration – a totality - of the various components of learning, e.g. spontaneous originality, emotional reactions, unconscious motivations, personal temperament and style, social and cultural context, as well as intellectual processes. (Blatner and Blatner, 1988, Huizinga, 1949). Play is a safe venue in which to practice adult behaviors and thoughts (Brown (2009). This idea of feeling safe in the play environment is central to the identification of play as a venue for development.

Tegano and Moran (2007) researched play among adults and identified among the characteristics of playful adults the following: open interactive style, resistance to evaluation, and tolerance for ambiguity. Open interactive style reflects an in-the-moment response and total immersion in the activity. Resistance to evaluation is seen in the relinquishing of obligations to previously learned, external rules. Tolerance for ambiguity refers to being open, flexible, and adaptable (Tegano and Moran, 2007).

Though all of these researchers are referring to play in the conventional understanding of game or role playing, I believe that the attributes of a person-at-play described here succinctly describe my students' responses to the G-Song. How then does the construction of this exploration create an optimal environment which encourages play?The use of a recurring pattern – ostinato – in skilled musical composition and improvisation is a commonly recognized occurrence. However, researchers of early childhood musical improvisation have found that even young children tend to naturally create unifying recurring patterns, such as ostinatos, in their improvisations (Moorhead & Pond, 1978, Flohr, 1981, Ockelford, 2007) It was also found that often, in children's group improvisation, one of the group's members provided a rhythmic ostinato to accompany the melodic adventuring of other members of the group (Beegle, 2010).What is it in the quality of this ostinato that affords it such a natural connection to improvisation and exploration?

"Talking about music or about the making of music necessarily involves the use of metaphors" (Gustavsen, p.5) and so I will allow myself a bit of metaphoric latitude in answering.I would suggest that the answer is multifaceted A rhythmic ostinato is a grounding in time and space. It provides a sense of security in it's cyclical nature with a steady pulse (perhaps even mirroring a heartbeat/breathing), providing a sense of musical safety essential

to fostering qualities of confidence and courage needed to explore the unknown and undetermined. The rhythmic aspect of this particular ostinato, being based on off beat syncopations, I believe, encourages a variety of improvisational rhythmic interpretations by removing a traditional beat accent orientation. We could liken it to a moving train. It moves you along and yours is the continual choice of whether to sit on it or to dance on it.The challenge here comes in being able to jump on board and balance your movements with the undulation of the train's rhythms. It demands of the improviser to experience the beat even if he/she is not stating it and to, at any moment in the improvisation, make an instantaneous choice of whether to connect with the ostinato's rhythmic motive (sit on the train) or juxtapose an alternative rhythmic conception (dance on it).

An harmonic ostinato, by nature, ties together disparate harmonic or melodic events happening on top of it. It encourages the improviser to be inventive and explorative by providing a known and continually recognized backdrop to exploration. The challenge presented is in the focused listening required to attend to how each extemporaneous sound produce is reflected off of the constancy of the ostinato, to inter-play with it but not be confined by it. The G-Song's use solely of an open fifth interval, with no note between to state a clear harmonic intention, again encourages divergent interpretations of the harmonic meaning. It allows for the choice by the improviser of multiple modes and poly-modalities, closely or distantly related to a 'G' base (or whatever root note is being used), according to the student's personal musical sensibilities.

In general then, an ostinato has the ability to create a bubble within which the improviser exists and adventures for a time. The repetition, ad infinitum, of an ostinato pattern creates an almost meditative, alternative dimension. This not only encourages mental and musical focus but may also contribute to inhibiting

instantaneous judgment which could stifle exploratory creativity and improvisational adventuresome-ness.

When I write that the G-Song creates an optimal environment in which the student may play, I do not mean one in which anything goes. What makes the G-Song ideal, I believe, is that it contains an exemplary balance between freedom and challenge, a balance which evolves with each new level of approach. This balance contains within it the possibility of enabling what Csikszentmihalyi calls flow. Flow is a state of self-actualization and optimization that results from balancing challenges with skills, moving in a “flow channel” with increasing challenges as skills increase (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). As they played the G-Song, from lesson to lesson, both of the students verbally expressed the following descriptors -- being in the moment; not analyzing what was happening; being intensely attentive to the task at hand; being in control but without worrying about what was happening, and having a clear goal. All of these descriptions are the indicators, according to Csikszentmihalyi, of being in a state of flow. (It is fascinating to note that within only a few lessons each of the students began referring to the G-Song as their personal mantra and repeatedly expressed a desire to "feel like I do in the G-Song" in other challenges undertaken.)

Guy

Guy’s initial work on the G Song has been documented in the chapter, Starting Point. By lesson 8, Guy was able to execute all of the initial tasks on the G Song with reasonable success in addition to some relatively complex rhythmic ideas. He freely played phrases of various asymmetrical lengths and allowed his phrases to end on an open note. As a result, his phrasing had a remarkably refreshing sound. In the following example, Guy used an harmonic combination (D major mode over the G ostinato – or G lydian) in

quite a sophisticated manner, creating a musical tension of unresolved motives that only finds closure in bar 10 with the appearance of the long note 'D'.

Guy G Song sample, lesson 8

On reviewing my recording of the G-Song in lesson 8, I noticed that at one point during what was a fluid and rhythmically interestingly improvisation, Guy attempted to move from a G major to a G minor mode but hit a 'glitch' - he lost the left hand's pattern. His immediate response was to revert back to a very basic on-the-beat quarter note line in the following several phrases. I found this fascinating and decided that it deserved my attention. And in the following week’s lesson I observed, in a similar fashion, an example of Guy’s relationship to risk-taking.

Guy began the G-Song with a short motive, which he developed for about 25 seconds (4 variations). The first minute of the improvisation was based strictly on eighth note and quarter note lines, something which it was clear by this time, was not a challenge for him. The first sign of risk-taking happened as Guy tried to improvise a quarter note triplet line, something which is quite difficult over this ostinato. This initial attempt failed – Guy temporarily lost the left hand pattern - and he slid back into the safety of his earlier on-the-beat quarter and eighth note lines, remaining there for seven successions of the left hand pattern. He made another attempt at the quarter note triplets, but again messed up the pattern. Again he returned to the safety of his earlier rhythms.

Next Guy attempted to improvise a syncopated phrase and again the pattern suffered. However, this time he immediately tried again (though again failing to sustain the pattern) and only after this second attempt returned to his comfort zone by playing a descending scale in eighths notes. What is interesting here is that the recovery time had gotten noticeably shorter. And, in fact, after these two failed attempts Guy returned to his original nemesis – the quarter note triplet. He was not successful but immediately tried again and succeeded.

At this point Guy turned his attention to a new challenge – eighth note triplets, another complicated rhythm over this ostinato. As mentioned above, triplet patterns of any note value are extremely complicated to play here as the triplet continually contradicts the beat of the ostinato. Guy's first attempt didn't succeed but he immediately tried again. This second attempt was successful and, Guy launched into an extended line of eighth note triplets which is not only perfectly executed but incorporates a beautiful use of motivic sequencing and movement through several modes.

Guy G-Song Lesson 9, example 1

He continued to freely integrate triplets with ease and, for the first time in the improvisation, several phrases in succession incorporating 16th notes. He played a beautiful triplet line introduced by a motive of a descending fifth and then immediately repeated note for note with an intricate metric shift.

Guy G-Song Lesson 9, example 2

There is an excellent example in this improvisation of Guy's response to unintended note choices. While improvising in the mode of G harmonic minor, Guy hit a B natural.

Guy G-Song Lesson 9, example 3

Guy's response to this was to temporarily lose the ostinato, though he recovered quickly and continued in his G minor mode. Further on Guy again hit an unintended note. He is still improvising in G minor harmonic mode when he plays a C#.

Guy G-Song Lesson 9, example 4

Guy allowed this unintended note to lead him to a B natural and herald a transition to a new mode (G lydian or perhaps E dorian).In the weeks that followed, I often left the choice of tonality of the G-Song up to Guy. He would choose a new ostinato key each week and use the G-Song to explore that tonal region as he had the original key of G. This would prove to be a crucial decision in the learning process as Guy began to use this transposing of the G-Song as a way to investigate harmonic regions and their complimentary melodic extensions in relation to many of the compositions that we studied.

In lessons 12 and 13, Guy played the G-Song transposed to Bb. He had no problem with any of his rhythmic ideas and exhibited total control in the new key. His improvisation displayed a wonderful

fluency of ideas, nicely developed melodic and rhythmic motives and increasingly intricate rhythmic ideas. I also began to hear some personal stylistic motives cropping up repeatedly in his playing, e.g. a variety of 16th note appoggiatura-style ornaments.

It was in lesson 13 that I began to hear that Guy's original default improvisation mode - thickly textured, chord-based, forte playing - which I had heard in his improvising since the very first lesson on every composition, was beginning to be replaced by a lyrical style and melodic sensitivity. (Guy's initial default mode of improvising at the outset of our project is discussed in detail in the chapter The Starting Point.)

I felt secure now in asking him to work on exploring poly-chords and their derivative lines, confident that he would now choose his use of chords to exploit the development of the piece and not as a default response. He was already quite comfortable and fluent in moving between a variety of related modes and I wanted to give him a platform to explore the unique sounds and tensions created by using distantly related scales. I decided that this could be an effective way to introduce Guy to the possibilities of combined harmonies and to encourage him to expand his melodic - harmonic terrain. In lesson 1, Guy's starting point with the G-Song had been almost exclusively atonal. Here, I hoped to reintroduce Guy to a less conventional sound but in the context of a conscious choice of melodic material. In other words, here he would have the opportunity to explore what sounds he likes and why, and how those sounds can be musically incorporated into his improvisation. It would be, in a manner of speaking, coming full circle.

Guy tackled this new challenge in lesson 14 with what can only be described as a new found courage which I had witnessed developing throughout the last several months. In the course of this

lesson's G-Song he utilized poly-chord harmonies creatively including – F, C, and C7 when improvising in a Bb major mode, and Gb, Ebm, Ab, and Fm when improvising in a Bb minor mode.At first Guy needed to play the actual chord before developing a melodic line incorporating the poly-harmony…

example 1: Gb major (@1:36)

example 2: F major (@2:06)

example 2: C major (@2:16)

But after a few minutes he was able to create a melodic motive that hinted at a poly-tonality without first playing the chord.

example 4: C major (@3:34)

I also noticed that Guy had begun to build his phrases in a fashion that alluded to cadential harmony.

example 5: ii – IV – I cadence (@00:46)

In order to better appreciate what theses advances meant to Guy, it is worthwhile to introduce here his comments:

Guy: " I think I used the poly-chords musically, not just as big blocks of sound. It's from all of the last two months and our work on melodic playing!"

He continued…"You know, while I'm playing the G-Song I am also thinking about this" – (he plays the pattern of another of our ostinato pieces, 'Explorations In Fourths') – "like how to take a motive from one scale and move it to another."

I was happy to see that Guy was making his own connections between the materials that we were working on, the specific areas of focus in each, and how they relate to each other. He finished by commenting…

"I think a lot of the progress I've made is mental, not technical. Even if I don't play this (the G-Song)everyday, all day I'm thinking about it and stuff that I'd like to try and do with it. Also, sometimes I try something again and again and I don't succeed, so I give it a rest and then later it works!"

In his lesson the following week (lesson 15), after a particularly creative G-Song warm-up, I asked Guy if he could describe how he felt now when he played the G-Song. He answered…

"I feel like there's an added dimension of 'time' somewhere that I can be in while I'm also in the dimension of playing-in-time. I can be the player and the observer at the same time – I don't know how! I can at once play and at the same time think about what I'm playing and where I want it to go. It's like being in a whole different dimension."

That in itself is the most succinct description possible of the improvisational 'space' and the improviser's relationship to that space.

In subsequent weeks we set a variety of specific tasks when playing the G-Song, e.g. exploring a particular mode, or moving from minor to major and back again. In lesson 21, the task was to begin and end the composition with the same melodic motive and was assigned in conjunction of motive work we were doing on the piece Twins (chapter X). This exercise is excellent for refining the ability to hear and relate to emergent qualities in an improvisation in that it requires both in-the-moment creation and aural memory (Appendix I:vi).

Discussion: Guy

Introducing the G-Song was, at the most basic level, the beginning of working toward a unity of the hands which is central to successful improvisation. In general, in improvisation the left hand is responsible for navigating the harmonic changes underlying an improvisation and the steadiness and self-sufficiency of that hand and it's part can be a major factor in the level at which a student is capable of improvising. All too often an improvisation falls apart either because the ground supplied by the left hand is unsteady or because the student is attempting to improvise beyond his current ability to unify the hands, as Guy did in his first attempt at the G-Song. Developing the habit of starting simple with a new musical challenge and having as a first priority establishing self sufficiency

of the ground and unity of the hands was a theme that Guy and I discussed often during our work together.

Throughout our lessons, we would often use the G-Song as a sort of warm-up at the outset of the lesson. This was designed to help focus Guy on the elements which he would need to be aware of as he improvised –melodic, rhythmic and harmonic development; organic unity and directionality, and –above all - focused listening. As Guy became more successful with it, the G Song became a sort of comfort zone, affording us the opportunity to add new musical challenges each week.

Guy's performance of the G-Song in lesson 9 (discussed above in detail) was particularly informative. Through Guy's lacks of success and his determination to succeed I was able to witness an instance of my student dealing with failure, in other words, confronting the unexpected.

How one deals with unexpected events is a central issue in the art of improvising and is intimately connected to exhibitions of risk-taking. An unexpected event in improvisation might be a sudden difficulty or lack-of-success in execution. When we try to play something we usually believe that we can succeed and our lack of success is, in this case, unexpected. An unexpected event might also be an unintended note – our hand falls on a note that we were not audiating in our internal musical dialogue.

As discussed above, on reviewing the recording of lesson 8, I had noticed that at one point Guy's failure to sustain the ostinato caused him to revert back to a non-challenging right hand line of simple quarter notes – a return to his comfort zone, if you will. In lesson 9, I focused more closely on Guy's responses to unexpected events and gleaned some fascinating insights regarding not only how he related to the unexpected but also how he responded to success and failure and how these might influence his willingness

to take risks. I came to hear and understand Guy's playing of the G-Song as an example of problem-seeking as Guy continually set out to discover his own limits and overcome them.I do not believe that Guy was merely moving from challenge to challenge at random in the improvisation of lesson 9. I believe that, for example, the success at the previous challenge 15 seconds earlier was a main catalyst for his exhibition of risk-taking which produced example 1 (above). As Guy proceeded with the improvisation, he gradually abandoned the need for a time out in his comfort zone each time an unexpected event happened.

Examples 3 and 4 (above) also reveal Guy responding to the unexpected, this time in the form of an unintended note choice. Guy's response to the first event – playing a B natural while improvising in G minor mode - hints at the fact that Guy had heard this unexpected event as a mistake, something to survive, and after which, to get back on track quickly (example 3). Seconds later, Guy encountered a similar event but this time, with what appears to be split-second aural processing, allowed the unexpected event of C# to become a guiding force in the discovery of a new tonality that accompanied him to the end of the improvisation (example 4). Guy immediately repeated this apparent mistake, perhaps to have a second hearing of its relationship to the ostinato, perhaps to give it the full weight of his musical conviction.

In four short minutes of problem-seeking, exploration, and risk-taking Guy had gone from a succession of failures to creative improvisation. He had continually posed new rhythmic challenges for himself, testing and pushing the limits of his unity of the hands, eventually finding not only success but his own way to create a musical statement out of that success. He made great advancement in his ability to listen for and respond to the emergent qualities of his improvisation, allowing them to contribute to his creative decision making.

Based on Guy's developing attention to lyricism and his conscious use of texture in improvisation, I had asked Guy to explore polychords and their derivative lines for lesson 14. His playing of the G Song had begun to consistently exhibit an exploratory spirit, readiness to take risks and acceptance of the challenge of being in-the-moment with the emergent qualities of the music. I intended this new assignment to begin to expose him to less conventional note choices and the ways that they relate to underlying harmony. In jazz, this type of playing is called playing out and though here the effect is significantly less dramatic (given that the ostinato is only 2 notes). The fact that Guy was able to construct improvisational phrases that hinted at polychords without actually playing the chords in his right hand told me that he was succeeding in pre-hearing the harmonic ground in his musical mind as he played (example 4). I had additional evidence of this in another attribute of this improvisation.

He appeared to be hearing where he wanted to go (e.g. a specific note of a cadential chord) and directing his phrase toward that culminating location (example 5). I cannot stress enough what a huge achievement this was. Guy had learned not only to audiate his melodic lines but to audiate the harmonic landscape as well.

Our work on the expanded G Song in lesson 19 was part of our first encounter with the issue of playing through the changes. Guy’s success was most likely helped by the fact that he himself was choosing where to change the chord and which chord to change to, but that does not diminish the physical and mental coordination required to make two musical choices on two distinct levels simultaneously. I also observed that Guy was clearly attempting to weave his way through the harmonic landscape without falling prey to the common pitfall of heading for the 'changing tone' of each new chord (e.g. Eb in C minor or E natural in C major). He appeared to be relying on his ability to audiate a melodic line that moved through the disparate chords.

It was an enlightening experience watching Guy search for and discover his personal voice week after week, each time in the context of some new musical challenge. Toward the end of our fifth month, Guy told me, "I hear and play simultaneously now, at a very fast speed. I know how every note and tension will sound and I know what I want to hear." In the months of lessons that followed, I continually recognized these skills that Guy had acquired from the G-Song presenting themselves in his improvisations on considerably more complex pieces. Guy himself informed me that he frequently returned to the G-Song when he was having particular trouble with a given piece– to clarify his ideas, hone his technique, and to find that 'other time dimension' where real improvisation happens. (Months later Guy would confess to me that his morning waking-up ritual always began with a playing of the G-Song. In his own words – 'It's better than 3 cups of coffee!')

Salome

I introduced Salome to the G-Song in her first lesson, as I did with Guy. I made a point of telling her that her first challenge was to be able to keep the pattern going while playing even one or two notes in the right hand. I did not suggest any tonality but left that open for her interpretation.

Salome's first attempt was slightly under a minute long. The first thing that she did was to slow the pattern down a bit. This was an excellent move on her part, knowing in what tempo she thought she might be successful. She chose the obvious tonality of G major and began with single notes, but quickly graduated to two or three per ostinato pattern. The first time she succeeded with a continuous line she began to giggle. When she had finished I asked her why she had started to laugh. I wasn't hearing that. I didn't

expect that! It's much harder and I really have to concentrate!, she answered. She giggled throughout this first encounter with the G-Song.

In this first lesson, Salome's improvising on the G-Song was dominated by a clear classical symmetry of phrase construction. Each phrase was 4 bars long (4 ostinato patterns), generally containing 2 equally balanced 2-bar motives in an antecedent-consequent construct and stopping at the end of each bar (ostinato pattern). In addition, she consistently began each new 2-bar motive on the first beat, a sort of continual joining-up between her two hands' disparate actions. The only exception to this in that first attempt is seen in example 1…

lesson 1, example 1

Salome was taking to the rhythmic challenge of the ostinato with much greater ease than Guy had. I asked her to sing as she did a second try. She stopped herself after less than 30 seconds. When I asked her why she had stopped she laughed and said, "I don't know. I felt like I was out of ideas." We talked about how all of the basic things she knows from playing classical music, e.g. dynamics, shaping a phrase, articulation, are the tools she'll learn to use when creating an improvisation. and I asked her to work at home on the G-Song, singing as she played.

The next week, Salome had conquered all of the challenges of the previous lesson. Her vocalizations (and subsequently her improvised phrases) were considerably more interesting and she was consistently able to play along with her singing voice. Her rhythms were varied and at times incorporating intricate

syncopations with ease. She only infrequently lost the left hand pattern. She also made extensive use of repeated motives. When asked to describe what she was hearing in her head as a basis for the improvisation she mentioned: G major scale and G minor scale with both a raised and non-raised 7th step – the most standard harmonic palettes. She also mentioned that stylistically she seemed to be hearing folksong-like motives plus what she characterized as a quasi – “Indian” motive. She played me an example …

I suggested that at home she play the two notes of the ostinato (G + D) in unison and experiment with the additional modes, scales or groups of notes that she finds interesting played on top of them.One trait that immediately stood out in Salome's playing of the G-Song was the fact that she ended every phrase on a note of the tonic chord. I decided to keep my eyes open for this in the next lesson.

There were several striking changes in Salome's playing of the G-Song in lesson 3. First, in contrast to her previous lessons where the average length of the exploration was two minutes or less, this week she kept her ideas flowing for close to four minutes! Second, she had expanded her harmonic-melodic palette from G major/minor to include G mixolydian, G major and minor pentatonic, G lydian and a G dominant #11 mode. Third, she began to abandon a small step, scale-wise motive construct, incorporating intervallic leaps of various sizes into her phrases, and lastly, she began her motives on various beats in relation to the ostinato pattern.

At one point, when I told her how much I liked the Lydian-based ideas she had created, she told me that she was hearing the sound of lydian mode in her head at that moment (though she didn't know

the technical name for it!) and it directed her forming of her phrase…

lesson 3, example 1(@01:36)

I suggested that for homework she explore other modes. I explained that exploring and practicing modes would help her recognize what a group of notes sound like and then be able to identify what she is hearing in her musical mind and execute it with her fingers.Despite all of her advancements described above, Salome’s default construct of the majority of phrases in lesson 3 was still 2 + 2 with each motive ending on a note of the tonic chord – G. I pointed out to Salome that, though she was creating interesting phrases, she was still often pausing in 2-bar units. I asked her to try to explicitly play through that barline in her next attempt. She found this incredibly difficult. When she did succeed she immediately stopped and asked me "How many was that? I lost track." She told me that, "It was really hard! I couldn't hear where I was going. It's hard for me to think that long.”

Salome discovered several solutions to this challenge on her own. "I decided to use simpler rhythms", she told me. Also, without my asking, Salome sang along with her playing. She also started playing several cycles (a random number) of the ostinato pattern between her phrases. She explained that, "I think the fact that I always started with 2 cycles of the pattern and inserted 2 empty cycles between phrases wasn't helping". She began to notice when she automatically paused after 2 bars of a phrase. At those moments she giggled and later explained why to me.

At the start of lesson 4, I set as a new challenge - that Salome begin and end the improvisation with the same motive and, if possible, revisit it a bit along the way. Below is the opening motive she played…

The first 2 minutes of the improvisation were fairly reminiscent of Salome's default style with phrases constructed around basic 2 bar motives, beginning mainly on the first beat and utilizing only G major and G minor. Into the 3rd

minute, she began, of her own initiative, to incorporate poly harmonies beginning with a 5 bar phrase based on a IV-I cadence (C to G) and then several phrases based on the lydian mode with strong hints at polytonality by the use of 2 simultaneous chord tones (bars 7-10). She also hinted at the original motive in transposition several times.

lesson 4, example 1

From this point, Salome got continually freer and more fluid, exploring the lydian mode with extended lines of 16th notes and poly harmonies. Two and a half minutes later that freedom led her to a G major pentatonic scale at which point she put down the sustain pedal, something she hadn't done in the G-Song since lesson 1. She continued to use the sustain pedal for the duration of

the time that she improvised in the G major pentatonic mode. Then she abandoned it.

lesson 4, example 2

Again, Salome made reference to her initial motive. In addition, in the 4th bar of this phrase she landed on 2 notes simultaneously – a major second. I immediately heard this as something unintended and after she had finished I asked Salome about it. She admitted that she had not meant to play 'D', only the 'E'. Based on the continuation of this phrase and the next section of the improvisation, it is obvious that this mistake afforded Salome the liberty to explore clusters, something which she had not done until now. She once again had allowed an unintended event to challenge her and lead her in a new direction (see lesson 3). It will come as no surprise that at this moment in the improvisation – Salome 'giggled'!

What happened next was, without a doubt, remarkable and unexpected. Having expanded her aural conception of the exploration, Salome turned to an extremely unusual scale choice – the wholetone scale…

lesson 4, example 3

Again Salome revisited her initial motive, developing and varying it, and continuing to explore clusters. Her ending, based on the original motive, was particularly creative.In subsequent lessons, as her harmonic voice developed, Salome made use of many unusual scales and modes in the G-Song. Several were even outside the classical harmonic palette, e.g. the hijaz mode of Arabic music, or other traditional Indian modes.In lessons 9 and 10 we began to work on improvising with a rubato feel ("out-of-time" playing). I did this in preparation for beginning work on ballad improvising in lesson 10. I also hoped that this new challenge would continue to help Salome explore additional non-symmetrical ideas. It took Salome several lessons to get the hang of the technique and be able to execute it successfully. One of the exercises that I used to help her was to have her run her fingers as fast as she could across the keyboard without concern for the notes that she was playing. My goal was for her to feel the physical sensation of moving at a fast speed and to see that she was capable of doing it by relaxing her hand and not worrying about 'sounding good'. My hope was that once she let go and got the sensation in her fingers and hands she would soon after be able to execute the

same types of lines with a conscious choice of notes and direction. It proved very helpful.

The difficulty came when I asked Salome to incorporate both in-time playing and out-of-time playing in the same improvisation. At first Salome found it impossible. Once in a given feel, she was unable to switch to the opposite feel. She first began to overcome this obstacle in the direction of out to in. She explained to me that when she was already playing out-of-time and wanted to go back in time she “would just listen for the beat of the ostinato”.

I suggested that at home she practice playing 2 minutes of each style, in a loop, pausing slightly between each to make the mental and aural switch. My assumption was that as soon as she became comfortable feeling how each style felt in relation to the other, she would be able to choose them at will. This exercise worked wonders and by the next lesson Salome was able to freely move back and forth between the different feels. A few lessons later she told me that both styles had become a natural part of her playing and that she could clearly audiate one or the other and simultaneously executes it.

Also in preparation for ballad improvising, I introduced Salome to the expanded G-Song,which I had also used with Guy in the same connection. I first gave it to her as homework in lesson 23 and asked her to try a little bit on the spot, just to see what her instinctive reactions would be. She played it for about 20 seconds. Below is as sample line…

lesson 23, example 1

Salome instinctively headed for chord tones to distinguish the alternating chords – e.g. Eb and Bb over Cm, E natural and B natural over C. She chose a G mixolydian mode for G and C which created a connection between those two chords. I was also pleased to see that she did not find it necessary to stop the improvisation as she changed chords in the left hand. I asked her to work on this expanded exercise at home and reminded her that both the length of the chords and their order were up to her.

Before playing the exercise at the following lesson, Salome told me that she had found it difficult to improvise in the right hand and make simultaneous choices as to which chord to use and how long to continue each chord in the left. She explained that her solution was to decide in advance the order of the chords and that each chord would appear for two bars. I was happy that Salome was finding her own ways to deal with the challenges of this new exercise and told her that I thought her choices were good ones. She still had the challenge of playing through the changes but had temporarily removed other decision-making obstacles – she was tackling the difficulties one at a time. Below is a sample phrase from that improvisation…

lesson 24, example 1

In the above improvisation, Salome still gravitated to key chord tones as in the last lesson, while using the mixolydian mode to connect the G and C chords. Her motives flowed nicely over the chord transitions and in fact, her insistence on 2-bar chords forced her to create an asymmetrical, 9-bar, phrase! Also noteworthy is the fact that the phrase ended on a non-chord note – 'A'.

Salome succeeded nicely with the exercise as she had designed it. I asked her to play it again, this time with several new tasks – (1) avoid always playing the chord tones for a given chord in her right hand lines; (2) sing as she plays; and (3) discard the 2+2+2 pattern for the chords and try to make the choices of 'what' and 'how long' spontaneously. She gave me a wary look and then said with confidence – "OK!" and a split second later…"Oh, God!". In fact, Salome was extremely successful with this new challenge and her instantaneous left hand choices encouraged exploration of new melodic modes and asymmetrical constructs (Appendix 1:vi).In this improvisation Salome also began to use a stylistic feature that would become a recognizable part of her personal style – a short appoggiatura (bar 5 – B natural to C). As she ended the last note, Salome exclaimed, "Cool! That was awesome!"

By lesson 25 Salome's expanded G-Song (now in 'D') had become a clear composition, exhibiting fluency of ideas and an overall, skillfully constructed, developmental concept (Apendix 1:vi)

Discussion: Salome

Despite her initial reticence, Salome took to the challenges presented by the G-Song with what appeared to be great ease. Within minutes, she was even able to incorporate syncopated lines. This ability not only indicated a high level of coordination between the two hands but also that Salome was feeling the underlying beat despite the fact that neither hand, at those moments, was expressing it.

My request that she sing along with her improvisation, was designed to encourage Salome to create longer, and possibly less symmetrically constructed phrases. It slightly backfired when Salome stopped quickly and told me that she had run out of ideas.

The truth was that her musical ideas when she was singing were considerably more pedantic than when she was not. Perhaps, though her sense of rhythm and rhythmic coordination were at what appeared to be an extremely high level, her ability to audiate was not. She was conscientiously following her vocalizations and as a result her hands were playing extremely simple lines. It is also quite possible that the division of 2+2 was a key element in helping her feel the cycle of the ostinato.

In regard to Salome's giggling - in time I came to notice that this was often Salome's response either when what she played surprised her or the fact that she had succeeded surprised her. It was not only a refreshing response but became one of the ways that I was able to understand what was going on inside of her head and how she was responding to her own actions.

The advancement that Salome made between lesson 1 and lesson 2 was surprising. In fact, throughout the process Salome would continually conquer major challenges from one lesson over the short span of a week and came to the next lesson ready for a new level of challenges. Salome's G-Song improvisation in lesson 2 is a wonderful exhibition of problem-finding on her part and, perhaps, a glimpse into her work habits at home as well. In this improvisation, Salome clearly made attempts at long-structured musical ideas – both longer motives and asymmetrical phrasing. She improvised 7 phrases, each progressively more adventurous.

In her opening phrase, Salome began in her previous safety zone – the question-answer/ 2 + 2, model with pauses at the end of each bar and sequential motivic development of both motives.

lesson 2, example 1

This "2 + 2" phrase, however, is extended by an addition 2 bars. Salome had now played an asymmetrical phrase.

In phrase 3 she was able to successfully remove the pause between bars 1 & 2 and bars 3 & 4, creating two longer motives that form a question and answer and incorporate a longer rhythmic motive sequence. She also introduced an F natural, shifting the tonal base to G mixolydian, and then reintroducing the F# as leading tone in bar 4.

lesson 2, example 2

In the next phrase she again succeeded in removing the pause at the end of each bar and again created 2-bar motives. For the first time, the second motive did not explicitly answer the first. At this point she also began experimenting with beginning the motive on a beat other than the first.

lesson 2, example 3

In phrase 5 she temporarily reverted back to her 2+2 antecedent-consequent construct, with pauses between each bar. But here she added an additional 2 bar tag making this her second asymmetrical phrase.

lesson 2, example 4

The last three phrases of the improvisation move well beyond Salome's default construct. Phrase 6 is one continuous musical idea

stretching 4 bars with no pauses and making use of both major and minor tonalities in a melodic sequence.

lesson 2, example 5

In phrase 7 she again experimented with beginning her motives on a beat other than the first and this phrase is seamlessly glued to her next and last phrase with pick-up notes. In three consecutive bars she succeeded in starting on a beat other than the first, connecting the two four-bar phrases with 2 eighth-note pickup notes leading to the second phrase and even introduced an attention to articulation by stacatto-ing those two notes.

lesson 2, example 6

The entire improvisation was 2 minutes long.

Salome had definitely taken to heart my suggestions of the previous lesson to try and create longer phrasing and to periodically abandon her classical default construct of 2 + 2. I would suggest that she has set a particular musical challenge for herself – the ability to hear (and create) in longer, less conventional units. It is also worthy of note that Salome, of her own initiative, was already using repetition and development of motives to construct her improvisation.

Lesson 3 was a revelation of Salome's growing ability to hear and respond to the emergent qualities of her own music making, as seen in her response to motives that ended on a non tonic-chord

note (example 2, below). Salome appeared to hear the lack of resolution in the phrase and respond by adding a 5th bar. At that moment she giggles. Salome's giggling always appeared at moments in the improvisation where she had surprised herself or where the music has surprised her, as did her own ability to navigate and direct the improvisational landscape. I would suggest that is what happened here.It is illuminating to investigate what was happening at those moments when the last note of a 4-bar phrase was not a tonic note.

In the first 2 minutes and 17 seconds of her improvisation, Salome broke away from her "2 +2" pattern only three times. I believe these three events are indicative of Salome's continuing experimentation with asymmetrical phrasing. The first instance came in phrase 4.

lesson 3, example 2

The first 2-bar motive of this phrase ended on a non-tonic note, contrary to Salome's usual pattern. When she ended the 4th bar also on a non-tonic note she appeared to sense the lack of resolution in the phrase and the necessity of continuing. She added one more bar which does end on a tonic note, creating a 5 bar phrase. What is most enlightening is that as Salome completed the asymmetrical phrase, as she found the solution to the challenge she herself had created…she giggles!

The next appearance of asymmetry is 3 phrases later.

lesson 3, example 3

Here, in fact, the fourth bar did end on a tonic note but she chose to continue.

The next instance of asymmetry was, in my opinion, truly extraordinary. In phrase 10 of the improvisation Salome played a standard 2 + 2 phrase ending on a tonic note (in this case – G on beat 3 of bar 4) but immediately continued on beat 4 of the same bar, and extended the phrase by two more bars.

lesson 3, example 4

All of these examples point back to musical challenges from Salome's last lesson where she attempted to create longer phrases. After this last phrase Salome's playing opened up with a new freedom. She confidently abandoned the safety of stepwise lines which had been common in her musical lines to this point, incorporated pickup notes, running lines of 16th notes, and progressively extended her phrases, going from 5 bars (with 2 pickup notes)…

lesson 3, example 5

to two phrases of 7 and 6 bars each, overlapping at the ending/beginning point (bar 7; again with pickup notes) …

lesson 3, example 6and ending with an 8 bar phrase (4 bars not ending on the tonic + 4 bars ending on the tonic) …

lesson 3, example 7.

Having recognized and responded to this lack of resolution and freely adding a 5th asymmetrical bar, Salome began to freely choose to create a series of asymmetrical phrases in succession, this time without any harmonic incentive.

It was interesting how difficult Salome found playing motives that were longer than 2 bars given how well she was apparently feeling the ostinato cycle and the underlying beat. It is possible that these smaller 2-bar units were in fact helping her to feel these elements. With this new request, she needed to begin to sense the cycle without noting it in her motive pauses.

I saw all of these solutions, more than solving this one isolated problem, as an indication that Salome was more and more learning to listen to what she was playing, audiating alternative musical choices. In fact, in a subsequent lesson she told me that, “It now happens to me much less that I play something I don't mean to. I more now am getting to the notes that I actually am hearing. It's a nice feeling!"

This issue of thinking and playing in longer lines did not resolve itself here. In fact for many lessons, as each new challenge was devised for the weekly G-Song Salome initially reverted back to her default constructs. This was understandable. As a new challenge is being worked on it is easier to simplify one's challenges in other areas.By lesson 4, Salome was excelling not only at the tasks that I presented to her but initiating use of advanced techniques such as

unconventional modes and poly-harmonies. I sensed in the improvisation of lesson 4, that Salome was uniquely in-tune with what she was playing, meaning that she was intensely listening and responding, exploring and taking risks. Even her choice to put down the sustain pedal at one point in the improvisation was, I believe, a result of listening and responding to the emergent qualities of her improvisation. I do not believe that this was accidental or unintentional. It is quite possible that Salome's extended exploration of poly harmonies in the previous few minutes of the improvisation enabled her to audiate both the harmonic and melodic material of her improvisation causing her to hear the pentatonic mode as a new melodic element and a new chordal palette ( enhanced by the sustain pedal) concurrently.We continued to use the G Song as warm up in lessons and as a preparation ground for future skills that we would work on such as ballad improvising (lessons 9-10 – out of time playing, and lessons 23-25 – playing through chord changes).

Discussion

A pedagogy toward 'personal voice' in improvisation must not be confused with a liaise faire attitude that allows the student to remain at the initial entry point level of when he first began to improvise. That entry point or "starting point", as I have referred to it in chapters X and X, may contain the seeds of a personal voice, but it also contains many 'default' responses based on previous musical experiences and studies, responses that are so ingrained in the player that he might not even be paying attention. (Even someone who has never improvised before will readily exhibit default constructs built on previously acquired comfort zones.) In contrast, 'personal voice' is a disposition which requires a process of discovery and development, and most of all – paying attention.

The process of discovery and development in my work with the students of this study was aided by several pedagogical ideals. First, I considered it essential that the student be involved in a process of continually expanding his/her comfort zone. In fact, this process is a vertical process, not a horizontal one. Expansion of comfort zones involves a deepening of the distinctive musical world of the student, aiding him/her in discovery of new elements of his/her personal voice which may be hidden below the surface, instinctive first response. Second, I committed to helping the student acquire the ability to listen responsively to the emergent qualities of his/her playing in all parameters – to 'pay attention'. Third, I saw as one of my prime tasks, to empower the student to make conscious musical choices in all parameters and to take responsibility for those musical choices. All of these points influenced and inspired by interventions throughout the study. And finally, was the conviction that musical expression must be a kinesthetic experience, not just an aural or intellectual one. This ideal played a central role in work on Exploration in Fourths, learning swing feel, and in work on exhibiting the shape of phrases with the movement of the hands ("dancing" with the fingers).

It is clear from the chapters detailed above that I brought to this study certain aesthetic ideals, and though aesthetic ideals must, by definition, contain an element of subjectivity, I believe that those ideals which influenced my work in this study form a consensus which would not be considered overly subjective. First, I worked under the premise that musical organization begins with attention to grouping (e.g. phrasing). We hear motives, phrases, in our heads, not random collections of notes. Many of my interventions and explorations were designed to encourage the student to discover his/her unique sense of lyricism (e.g. asking Guy to improvise with single notes in both hands – lesson 6; motive work on the G Song and The Ground; improvising inside an octave; and, of course, singing while improvising).

The second element of my aesthetic ideal was that organic unity, not a predetermined form, is the underlying structure in musical expression. A musical statement, when possessing an organic unity, dictates its own form, its own musical 'sense', whether in improvisation or composition. This ideal necessitates the development of the ability to listen responsively and inspired such assignments as: repeated motives in the G Song and other compositions, and the expanded G Song.

In hindsight, I would suggest that the pedagogical ideals mentioned above kept a check on these aesthetic ideals. They allowed for what might have begun as a personal, slightly subjective, aesthetic to be molded by the student into his/her personal voice.

Guy

Starting Point

Guy's initial response to the activity of improvising was enlightening. In both of the explorations of lesson 1 ( Shifting Chords and the G Song), he appeared to be, on the one hand, holding fast to his learned 'rules' and attempting to navigate within them while on the other hand, demonstrating a willingness to search beyond those conventional sounds as seen in his use of atonal ideas.

As we moved on to a simple repertoire piece, we encountered a common habit of beginning improvisers – playing without pauses in the improvisational line. In my experience as a teacher, there seems to be an unspoken but felt obligation to keep the music going at all costs. It is perhaps a reflection of making that transition to accepting musical responsibility inherent to the act of improvising. And it is the beginning of a crucial process in which

the musician learns to listen intensely to the phrases he is producing and to recognize and respect the organic flow of the phrase, at times relinquishing control and letting the music 'breathe', understanding that this too is part of the musical statement.

I began to ask Guy to sing with his improvisation in our second lesson. I did this with the goal of developing Guy's audiation skill. In the act of improvising, audiation is expressed in the ability to pre-hear what one is about to play and is a central factor in developing improvisational skill as well as a personal voice. It is a way to tap into the musical landscape unique to the student's sonic world and move him away from technically proficient finger-directed improvisation. Singing also encourages invention of more lyrical and less exclusively technical phrases as we tend to hear melodies in our heads and not random technical lines. It also encourages the player to breathe, to create space between his musical thoughts and ideas, and to learn the importance of incorporating silence into our musical ideas. As Keith Jarrett told John Fordham of The Guardian, "if you want to reveal yourself, you also have to know where to stop."

Guy made nice progress in the first few lessons in all of the initial assignments and began to exhibit more confidence in what he was doing as well as a noticeably larger measure of risk taking. He appeared to have embraced the process as one in which exploration took precedence over sounding perfect. In general, throughout our year and a half, it was common for us to remain with the same assignments for a month or more. This was dictated by the nature of our work as I saw it -- a process of developing new habits, as opposed to mastering repertoire. In hindsight, I believe that this slow, in-depth work on individual explorations and pieces - making every new assignment a new comfort zone for Guy - was one of the significant elements in Guy developing his unique sound.

I chose to begin Guy's exposure to a jazz repertoire with a jazz composition by a contemporary Scandinavian jazz artist. The Nordic style, as it is called, is a unique blend of classical and jazz elements, as well as folk music and I believed that Guy, as a classically trained pianist, would be able to relate to this composition. We would use several compositions from the Scandinavian and European jazz repertoire in our work together as I believed that the different sounds of jazz apparent in these styles would be an appropriate beginning taste of the wide boundaries of the jazz genre today and encourage Guy to explore his own unique musical sensibilities as he developed a personal jazz voice.

In lesson 6, Guy brought me his first original composition, Piano Love. I was pleasantly surprised at the level at which Guy was able to confront the improvisational challenges of this composition. In fact, throughout future lessons, as Guy brought me additional original compositions I would witness a similar rising to the challenge that was sometimes not as apparent in our initial work on repertoire pieces. As will be discussed in the chapter on the use of original compositions as referents, Guy seemed to come to these original compositions with a level of vested interest and immediate affinity which often allowed him to conquer musical challenges that were initially difficult for him in other explorations and pieces.

As Guy played and improvised on his original composition I had several observations. First, I sensed that in this first improvisation Guy was relying heavily on his learned theoretical knowledge and classical habits. Second, there was a lack of repeated or developed melodic motives as the improvisation presented itself in a continuously changing variety of ideas in the key of C minor, more often than not following stepwise motion. Guy appeared to be drawn to a thick, quasi-romantic harmonic texture. (By bar 17 he was already employing block chords in his right hand at a forte dynamic, camouflaging any hint at a melodic line.) Third, I noticed that his constant use of the sustain pedal aggravated this thick, harmonically -monopolized texture of the improvisation. This

prompted me to open up for discussion the variety of ways available to create intensity and drama in an improvisation, of which Guy was able to list quite a few besides forte dynamics and thick chord texture. I believed that if I could move Guy away from what I will call his ' default mode' and his tendency to rely on his theoretical learning, he would be better able to explore the lyrical aspects of his improvisational ideas. This prompted me to ask him to play another improvisation using only single notes on each hand.

The fact that Guy slid into a rubato tempo when asked to play his improvisation with single notes in each hand was, perhaps, his unconscious way of dealing with the multitude of elements that he was asked to control and account for. It is possible that the extensive use of chords in improvisation #1 provided a certain grounding, both a psychological and physical security, which allowed Guy to navigate through the piece while the clear statement of chord harmony supplied his feeling of the beat. In the new territory of improvisation #2, with all of his familiar devices suspended (or rather not explicitly stated), the improvisation took on the persona of an extended exploration. It is possible that Guy was now focusing all of his attention on this exploring and searching, at the expense of attention to the beat and meter.

We would return to this topic many times in subsequent weeks as I came to recognize it as a standard response in the beginning work on many pieces. I began to view this issue - accounting for all the parameters of his performance in real time - as one of many challenges that Guy would face in this new situation of improvisation.

Despite this symptomatic issue, the new developments in Guy's second improvisation mentioned above were accompanied by (and I believe enhanced and possibly inspired by) the clearer and more varied articulation afforded by the sparser texture created through the use of single notes, as well as Guy's own choice not to use the sustain pedal.

This lesson proved to be the beginning of Guy developing an attention to 'feel' – the way one can influence an improvisational phrase by subtly varying the articulation of individual notes. And…he never again automatically put his foot on the sustain pedal!

Exploration in Fourths

The designing of this ostinato pattern and the work to be done with it was a direct response to difficulties that I perceived Guy was having regarding certain aspects of rhythm. In his classical studies, Guy's sense of pulse and form had always been expressed by the pulse and form of a given composition which he merely needed to execute correctly. That is quite different from being expected to feel and relate to an unstated pulse and form, a skill which Guy would be called upon to use in future improvisational work on jazz repertoire. In fact, we had done comparatively simpler work regarding this issue in the very first repertoire piece – Tears Transforming. There, Guy needed to feel the pulse and form as he improvised on 2 chords so that he would be aware when he arrived at the key change and was expected to play the written melody. In the exploration here, the tempo is considerably faster and the form has an asymmetrical feel since the improvisation happens only on bars 2-4. All of these presented challenges to Guy at the beginning.

I had noticed throughout our previous lessons that Guy's sense of rhythm appeared less developed and less secure than his melodic or harmonic sense. This exploration became not only a testing ground for that rhythmic skill but also a ground in which to build it. Each week was built on the success of the week before, beginning with simply counting the form outloud without improvising, which was not difficult for Guy.

The first joining of the hands that we did, running scales in the right hand over the ostinato, also appeared to be relatively easy for

Guy. It is possible that he was able to succeed in this scenario, without counting aloud, because he more or less knew what his right hand was going to do – it was a familiar schema, a scale. This left him relaxed and able to focus on the sensation of 'time going past' in the pattern. It also allowed him, I believe, to begin to kinesthetically absorb the feel of the cycle which would help him when he eventually tried to improvise on the exploration.

This acquisition was proven in lesson 11 when Guy sang improvisations as he played the chord pattern. It was clear that Guy was succeeding in feeling the form as well as making an instantaneous switch in his head from one tonality to another at the moment of key transition – hearing the new harmonic landscape, if you will. Both in this vocal improvisation and in his initial instrumental improvisation, Guy periodically extended the last 4 bar section immediately preceding a key transition. It is possible that either he felt a greater musical momentum at these moments, causing him to extend his phrase. or that this was an expression of his need to have more time to mentally adjust to moving into a new, distant harmonic region.

I was pleased to see Guy, of his own initiative, using the element of motivic development in his first instrumental improvisation on this exploration. We had devoted much time to this topic in our work on the G Song and Guy had apparently begun to assimilate motivic development as a way to initially approach new material by simplifying ideas and working with a known musical element.

The fact is that Guy "hated" this exploration (to use his own words). Despite the fact that he slowly saw success, he found it tremendously frustrating and difficult. The decision to stop before Guy had completely mastered the task was in response to this continual negative response on his part. Over the following months we did, I believe, see the fruits of his momentary persistence here in his playing of many of the repertoire pieces.

The Melody Hidden in the Octave

Having devoted a little over three months developing basic skills of improvisation we turned our attentions to what may be described as a mini testing ground for those skills – an eight bar improvisational section in which the student must navigated constantly changing harmonic changes. The natural response of student improvisers to a complex piece such as I Would Have Called Her Sam is generally to follow the chord changes and use notes from each separate chord as improvisational material, in other words – to rely on their theoretical knowledge in the choosing of improvisational material. The result can be an improvisation that sounds like the player is 'chasing the chord changes' instead of creating a coherent musical statement. This is in fact where Guy began with this assignment.

In his first improvisation on Sam in lesson 15, Guy was constantly introducing accidentals appropriate to each subsequent chord. This led me to suspect that he was analyzing his way through the improvisation rather than attempting to hear his way through it. In the subsequent lesson, when I asked him to sing along with his fingers, the improvisation was of a different nature all together. The fingers were now clearly under the influence of the voice. The lyrical movement of the improvisation, and the anticipation of chord changes in the lines, told me that Guy was not only inventing in the moment but was engaging in an advanced level of audiation - hearing the changes of the harmonic landscape before they happened..

In the course of improvising, one needs not only be able to 'hear where I want to go' – the next musical idea already playing in my head – but to be able to mesh that idea, through prehearing, with what's about to happen (in Guy's word) in the harmony of the piece. Being able to pre-hear and anticipate that changing harmonic

landscape is central to creating an organic and musical improvisation. I believe that our work here on singing with the fingers as well as our simultaneous work on this issue in the expanded G Song was significant in Guy's success with this piece – and others.

We also devoted considerable time to perfecting the playing of the piece's melody. I would suggest that a sensitivity to lyricism comes from knowing how to play a melody and it is that premise which led me to devote the next three lesson to learning to play the melody of this piece, before we even began improvising on it.

We would return to this type of in-depth attention to the melody of a piece in subsequent lessons each time we began work on a new composition and I never hesitated to devote an entire lesson to perfecting the performance a melody. Beyond the issues of developing a sensitivity to phrasing that this type of work afforded there was an additional reason that we devoted so much time to this topic. In my opinion (and experience as an improvising musician), the presentation of the melody of a piece is a crucial element in directing the improvisation that follows, it is the starting point, the springboard, of that improvisation in several ways: (1) the atmosphere created in the melody finds a direct continuation in the improvisation, (2) an artistic, 'inspired' presentation of the melody – including an understanding of the basic motivic elements of that melody --encourages an artistic, 'inspired' improvisation (as does a bland presentation dull the improvisation), and (3) the deep connection that the improviser forms with the piece by devoting his energy to perfecting the presentation of the melody will deeply influence his own statement on that piece in his improvisation. As I told Guy in one of his lessons, your improvisation only exists by the grace of this person having written this beautiful melody.

Twins: Putting the Pieces Together

Being able to improvise an extended solo which is musically coherent, organically unified, and creative, requires a variety of skills. The first, of course, is control of the building blocks of the piece – harmony, melody (improvisational palettes), rhythm, and form. Only after the student has mastered the building blocks of the composition (and ideally learned the piece by heart) can the student and teacher begin to focus on the contents of the improvisation. In addition, the student must develop the ability not only to create in the spontaneous present, playing whatever comes to hand, but also the ability to (1) recall past moments and refer back to them in the unfolding present, (2) audiate the future harmonic and melodic landscape to create directionality of idea, and (3) hear and respond to the emergent qualities of the musical present.

Though Guy quickly mastered the elements of melody, rhythm , and form of this piece, the element of chords, proved to be his nemesis for several weeks. It was not until we had our conversation in lesson 20 (discussed above) that the issue was quickly resolved.

I learned many things from that conversation. I learned that while Guy believed in what we were doing together he felt an unspoken pressure, given that we were heading toward improvising Jazz, to fit in (perhaps in order to eventually be taken seriously as a jazz pianist?). I heard Guy's doubts in his own ability to pave a path for himself, which might account for his 'standing up for' the standard way of doing things in this instance. I heard him questioning his own conclusions, trying to determine whether his difficulty with this new material was because it was difficult and on a more advanced level (in which case he needed to work harder) or whether the reason for the difficulty was the material's incompatibility to his own musical world.

In the end, I believe that I made the right choice in not pursuing the study of standard jazz voicings. Looking back, I would argue that that decision was one of the main facilitators in Guy developing his own harmonic world which is apparent in his compositions and improvisations a year later.

This incident also highlighted a crucial dynamic at work in the approach I have used with the students of this study –the relationship between restrictions and freedom. The topic of restrictions and freedom in improvisation is by no means my own discovery. Just the fact of a referent in improvisation - a given tune and its unique musical qualities - is a restriction of the most fundamental nature. The paradox is that, when utilized creatively, restrictive parameters become the inspiration for the free expression of a musical mind.

I had made use of external restrictions numerous times in the course of my work with the students in this study, e.g. the structure of the G song and Exploration in Fourths, improvising with only one motive, and playing inside one octave. For me, the question was not whether to impose musical restrictions. The question was what type of restrictions best encourage the student's development of a personal voice? There is, I believe, a huge difference between a restriction such as playing within one octave as we began to use in lesson 14, and a restriction such as use scale X when improvising over chord Y. The former leaves open to the discretion of the student 'what he will play' while at the same time creating a focused space in which to explore, minimizing the possibility of being overwhelmed by too many choices. The latter instructs the student 'what to play'. My asking Guy to use the standard jazz voicings was an instance of the latter.

Guy had already exhibited an ease in being able to perform freely and fluidly in the spontaneous present in previous assignments. That is, after he had learned a given exploration or composition he could meander for hours in improvisational bliss. The difficulties

came as we began to focus that meandering by relating past to present to future in the improvisational statement – recalling and developing central motives. As noted in the chapter Twins, in Guy’s first improvisation on this piece (lesson 20) he had improvised an entire chorus with no rests, creating an endless stream of new ideas and only once developing a motivic idea.

Between lesson 22 and 25 Guy grappled with not a small number of additional obstacles – some musical and some, I believe, psychological. Initially, in lesson 22, Guy was able to build an improvisation around a preplanned motive. I believe the fact that I allowed him to compose the motives in advance gave the exercise a semi-classical quality: he had 'planned in advance' many things that would happen in the improvisation and this allowed him to feel more comfortable and confident. The following week, however, when I asked him to improvise motives on the spot, he could not. It is possible that (1) his ability to audiate was not developed enough to hear the motive clearly as it moved through various transformations, or (2) his lack of ability to focus on the task at hand while at the same time accounting for all the variables of the complex piece proved too much for him.

I had suspicions that there was an additional factor to Guy's difficulties in sustaining an improvisation, based on previous events and off handed comments Guy had made.

After he had become comfortable with the chord changes in lesson 24 and was still having difficulties with the assignment, I had actually told Guy that his problem was not with the piece per say (as he had claimed) but rather "with focusing on one thing alone and being happy with that." Listening back to the lesson's recording that evening I realized that Guy's difficulty was more than not being happy with a simple idea. He was struggling, I believe, with an essential dichotomy of the improvisational act – freedom and structure. As stated above, for an improvisation to be more than a

meandering collection of unconnected ideas, the player needs to balance between spontaneity and focused listening-responding.

I have already written above of several shorter or longer conversations that Guy and I had regarding his frustration with not being able to improvise at the same level that he had previously played classical music compositions. I have also noted Guy's comments about the mechanical aspect of our learning new tools and his opinion that the results were not music. In connection to this, I had noticed throughout our lessons that Guy had a tendency to mentally float or phase out while improvising and I believe these were, consciously or unconsciously, his way to try and achieve the same type of transcendental musical state he had known from playing classical music. In this situation such a mental pose, I believe, caused him to lose focus on tasks at hand, lose his place, play too much, forget his starting motive, etc. His desire to 'flow' in that transcendental state got the better of him – making him unable to control whether he played unrelated ideas even when the assignment was very explicit that ONLY THE MOTIVE gets played – he wanted it to sound like great music now.

In lesson 25 Guy was able to focus enough on what was happening in his improvisation to respond in realtime, creating and developing spontaneous musical ideas, and in lesson 26 he again succeeded beautifully at the task. But Guy would continue to struggle with the dichotomy of freedom and structure and his own inner demons of success and failure for the better part of a year.

Learning to Swing

Of all of the elements connected with jazz playing perhaps the most elusive – to explain and to master – is a swing feel. It is so contrary to our western musical sensibilities that it seems "really strange",

as Guy put it. In my own development as a jazz pianist, it took well over a year, dozens of solo transcriptions, and hours of listening, before I felt comfortable with this unique approach to time. The fact that Guy appeared to take to it with such ease in our work on The Message was both astounding and, in retrospect, misleading. I now believe that Guy would have been well served by devoting time to many more transcriptions and phrase by phrase work as we had done on the EST solo. His task might also have been made easier if the choice of pieces had progressed gradually from a piece based on 1 chord to more complex pieces – paying attention to keeping the contemporary swing feel intact as we advanced from level to level. My attempts to rectify the mistake of jumping from the EST piece to the Kenny Wheeler piece too soon were, in this case perhaps, too little too late. Bad habits had been developed that now needed to be undone.

But beyond this basic pedagogical mistake, I would suggest that there were several additional factors at play which deserve discussion. First, the fact that Guy continually succeeded in producing an excellent swing feel in the heads of Everybody's Song But My Own and Driftin' and the transcribed Dexter Gordon solo I find reminiscent of other incidences in our work together when prior preparation and planning enabled Guy to succeed in performance – a success which he found hard to duplicate in spontaneous improvisation. An example of this is the work we did with preplanned motives on the composition Twins (see p. XX). At only 6 months into the process Guy appears to still be most comfortable when he is afforded the opportunity to approach a piece, to some degree, as he would a classical composition, preparing how and what he will play in advance and this is evident here.

I also recognized here another recurring issue with Guy – his self imposed internal pressure to create great music at every lesson, in every assignment. We had discussed this when working on Twins and I had struggled at that time to focus Guy's attention on the

small details that eventually, when mastered, would be responsible for that great music being created. Here, as there, Guy found it extremely difficult to limit his focus (and ambitions) to mastering one small task and frequently forgot what the task was as he got caught up in the complexity of the pieces. It was clear from his work on The Message that when the temptations of complex harmony and structure were removed Guy was capable of creating excellent swing improvisations, near perfect in all aspects. He kept his phrases simple and elegant, which allowed him to not lose the swing for the sake of complicated musical ideas. His use of space was exquisite and his musical phrases were recognizably idiosyncratic to his own developing style. However, as soon as we began work on more complicated pieces, those same temptations – to prove his ability to create complex improvisations on complex harmonies – continually got the better of him. This, perhaps, explains why he expressed such satisfaction with the improvisations that he did on the Kenny Wheeler piece, despite my pointing out the many shortcomings regarding our initial goals. He had set for himself a different goal which I was, again and again, finding it hard to compete with.

Most critical, however, is the fact that at the same time that we began working on swing playing and improvising, Guy began studying jazz swing-big band styles and jazz harmony in his classes at the academy. One of the premises of this research has been that the developmental sequence of creating a personal voice in improvisation needs to begin before introduction to traditional, predetermined improvisational systems. When the student is introduced to jazz systems at the outset of his improvisational journey, one runs the risk of these systems becoming the groundwork for the student's emerging voice. Once these systems are imbedded in the musical consciousness (or subconscious) of the student it is all but impossible for the student to hear a different approach to the material. When the student is allowed the freedom to discover his own idiosyncratic approach to the material and only later

introduced to rigid systems, these same systems may be viewed as an additional option which the student may choose to incorporate into his own style (or not) in a manner he deems appropriate. The groundwork remains that of the student's unique voice.

It appeared that once Guy was introduced to jazz harmony systems and traditional swing style it affected his ability to approach the material in any other way. There was little resemblance to his distinctive lyrical style that had been evident to this point in all of his work. Instead of traditional jazz elements being just another option they became the only option. Guy's statement, when I told him that he sounded like someone trying to play like a jazz pianist, sums it up well – "You say this as if you expected something different!"

It was during our work on swing feel that I began to understand a number of interacting forces influencing Guy’s search for, and development of, his personal improvisational voice. It became clear to me that there were three distinct environments in which this process of discovery/ development was being played out: (1) Guy’s private lessons with me; (2) the environment of the Contemporary Composition department at the music academy; and (3) Guy’s own internal environment. In our lessons, Guy was being encouraged to explore and make his own musical choices. This environment demanded of Guy a large measure of patience, faith in the process and the necessity of building habits from the ground up. I might suggest that a desire to ‘impress the teacher’ was also present, despite my desire to keep the process student – directed. In Guy’s school environment he was called upon to learn set material and to prove that the learning had been successful. There was a right way and a wrong way and he was expected to display a high level of mastery of the right way. This, I believe, accounts for such statements by Guy as, “Why should I make up my own voicings when they’ve already found the best ones?” and “You say this as if you expected something different!” As a result of these diverse approaches, I often found it necessary to remind Guy that it was

“ok” to explore his own understanding of the elements of the style and his place within that style.

In Guy’s internal environment a different dialogue was taking place. The dissatisfaction that Guy had verbalized in a previous lesson regarding his inability to perform in this new medium at the level he had in classical music, was pressuring him to attempt complex improvisations before basic building blocks were in place.

All of these disparate environments alternately enhanced or conflicted with each other for the duration of the study, demanding of me (as teacher) intense focus, empathy and diplomacy. This reality of multiple forces might also explain the fact that all of Guy’s major breakthroughs came after several-week breaks in our lessons. It is possible that in those ‘incubation periods’, Guy was able to temporarily step outside of these conflicting environments and allow the material to be assimilated in an organic fashion.

Mindiatyr: The Ultimate Challenge

The complexity of this piece dictated approaching the improvisation on a variety of levels: (1) isolating the left hand chord changes, learning and investigating them; (2) aurally investigating a variety of lyrical approaches that might be incorporated into an improvisation, e.g. exploring unconventional note choices, creating a variety of palettes for extended use, utilizing the unique color of various chords; enharmonic possibilities; motive develop; and (3) rhythmic coordination and metric juxtaposition.

We spent considerable time isolating the particular rhythmic challenges and working toward mastery. Rhythm, throughout our process, had been Guy's nemesis in each new piece and exploration, whether expressed in the coordination required for two-hand playing or in the ability to feel a steady underlying pulse while at the same time improvising within or against that pulse.

This piece presented a new level of detaching from – while relating to – the left hand's role. I was particularly happy with Guy's discovery that, "As long as I was calculating, it didn't work. So I said 'O.K. I have to just feel how it feels and then it worked!" We had discussed several times before the need to physically sense a musical element rather than calculate it and this statement told me that Guy was in the process of developing an important musical habit – kinesthetic learning.

I was also happy at Guy's initial response to Stenson's unusual note choices in the melody of the piece. This told me that he was already confronting the aural challenges of the piece and I was optimistic that he might allow the harmonic-melodic freedom of the composer to expand his own aural sensibilities. In fact, from the beginning of our working on this piece to the final improvisation, Guy's personal parameters of acceptable sounds expanded until he had discovered his own idiosyncratic approach to the composition. Most obvious was his evolving relationship to use of blue notes.

We did not work on the proper use of blue notes. I merely exposed Guy to them and explained Stenson's use of them in his own improvisation in the second lesson. At that time, Guy expressed a serious aversion toward them and I did not press the issue further. Over the weeks, as Guy's exploration of his own personal voice in this piece progressed, he came to incorporate these unusual sounds in his own way and in surprising moments. Blue notes became not a learned system, notes which Guy chose as theoretically appropriate choices or as an acquired default, but rather a sound that his musical mind heard as an organic part of his own personal voice, integrated into that voice. This, I would suggest, is in direct contrast to the manner in which Guy was unable to free himself from traditional jazz swing constructions in our work on Kenny Wheeler's piece, discussed above in the section Learning to Swing.

As had often happened in the learning of a new piece, Guy's final mastery of this piece and personal idiosyncratic interpretation came after a break – an incubation period (four weeks in this case) – in which learned materials had settled in on their own.

Salome

Starting Point

From our first lesson together it was clear to me that despite the fact that she had no serious experience with improvisation, Salome had an already innate ability to focus her attentions on the emergent qualities in her playing, something which would be crucial in her development as an improvising musician. This was apparent in the manner in which she took to the first improvisation - Shifting Chords.

At first when I asked her to try improvising on this exploration she froze. She sat as if she were incapable of deciding what to play or even how to begin, a response which I would encounter numerous times in our work together. Often, as we began working on a particular challenge, Salome would ask me "What should I do?" or "Should I…?" Given that Salome conquered these challenges extremely quickly and assimilated new ideas and skills from one lesson to the next, I do not believe that this hesitancy stemmed primarily from a lack of knowledge or confusion. I believe that Salome, in some manner, related to the experience of learning to improvise in the same manner that she related to learning a new classical piece, i.e. the teacher will tell you how to play it. It took many months before Salome stopped asking me for the roadmap and gave herself permission to design that roadmap herself.

The element of a visual visceral response to her musical offerings, evidenced in the first few lessons, would prove to be an additional vantage point from which I observed and attempted to understand what Salome was doing when she improvised – a raised eyebrow when something she had played surprised her; a giggle or a smile; a tip of the head; even a rhythmic bouncing movement in her shoulders as she connected with the movement of a particular rhythmic idea that she was playing – all of these would be invaluable invitations into the inner workings of an improvising musician. They would also be, I believed, invaluable tools for Salome herself. Much of our work toward jazz improvising would be built on the student's ability to feel the unique musical parameters of contemporary jazz playing, not simply understand them. Salome's willingness and ability to physically enter the space of the music would serve her well in this regard.

I also recognized from these first several lessons that Salome had a highly developed and firm sense of rhythm. She took to rhythmic challenges with great ease and her playing within a 'groove' was noticeably more fluid. I actually pointed out to her, in lesson 2, that when she has a rhythmic framework it appeared that her ideas flowed more naturally. She asked me why I thought that was and I responded that my first guess would be that some musicians express themselves better with less restrictions placed on them and some better when there are more restrictions placed on them. "Just like some people work better under pressure." Later that evening, listening back to the recording of the lesson, I actually came to an additional conclusion - that when the chords were scheduled to happen at a given moment, when Salome was playing in a known tempo, she likely didn't have to think about them as much allowing her to focus on the improvisational lines.

In fact, though I didn't yet know it, the dichotomy between freedom and structure as it is expressed in playing rhythmically vs. detaching from the beat, would prove to be a central issue in my work with Salome, as it was

with Guy. Salome's ideas flowed most naturally when she created them within a structure of beat and symmetrical phrasing. It might even be said that Salome exhibited a strong need for a clear pulse, both in the underlying rhythm and in her own phrases, in order to create improvisational lines. Much of our work, in future lessons, would be toward stepping outside of that comfort zone and allowing for the inclusion of other ways of feeling time and creating a musical line.

Salome’s improvisations in these first few lessons, on the piece Tears Transforming, highlight central challenge in our process – the ability to make musical choices simultaneously in a variety of musical parameters. This fundamental skill, without which organic improvisation cannot happen, must be worked toward in stages. The first stage was my accompanying Salome while she improvised, leaving her to focus on one parameter alone. At the next stage (in lesson 3), Salome was called upon to play a predetermined left hand pattern while improvising. There were now two parameters for which she was responsible but one was fixed while the second was created in the moment. Salome, at first, had difficulty with this new stage and when she did succeed it came at the expense of the improvisational line, as she regressed to much simpler and noticeably less exploration. This was to be expected. Eventually Salome would become comfortable with the physical and mental coordination of stage 2 and in subsequent pieces we would move on to stage 3 where Salome would make choices simultaneously in both hands. (As seen previously, I had worked with Guy on several pieces in a similar manner, developing this multi-tasking ability according to these three stages.)

The advantages of singing while improvising were quite apparent in Salome's first few lessons. In general, Salome's singing appeared to provide her with the ability to hear longer phrases and create lyrical lines that travelled organically through changing chords. I believe that it helped her to engage in forward thinking and hearing as she shaped her musical ideas, something which was not

apparent when she stopped singing and let her fingers lead. Given that the goal was for Salome to be able to hear her inner musical dialogue and translate this to her fingers without using her external voice, these first improvisations revealed that Salome began the process with already advanced abilities toward that goal. In fact, throughout our work together Salome often spontaneously began singing in the middle of an improvisation. As will be discussed, she always had a reason for doing so which she could readily explain when I asked.

Another fact that came to my attention during these first few lessons was Salome's gradual willingness to take risks which included – (1) expanding her musical belief system, (2) exploring and investigating with the goal of discovering new possibilities, and (3) jumping headfirst into a new challenge. A prime example of this was in her first improvisation on Tears Transforming in lesson 2 (Track?). From the beginning of the improvisation to the end, Salome's level of risk-taking grows as she moves from her initial tentative-sounding half note – quarter note rhythms that parallel the rhythmic movement of the accompaniment to ever more complex rhythmic syncopations. This risk-taking is also visible in her own initiative to begin her subsequent improvisational sections as a pickup figure, rather than wait until the designated improvisational section begins anew (e.g. bars 32 and 48). Another example of Salome's risk-taking came in lesson 4 when she specifically requested that we begin the lesson working on playing the Shifting Chord exploration with an out of time feel, something which had been difficult for her in previous lessons. This was something that I would come to notice in Salome's approach to our work – she always liked to tackle her biggest challenges first.

Exploration in Fourths

I cannot explained why Salome initially chose to play this exploration in swing feel. Perhaps it was because of our work on her original 'swing' composition in previous lessons. I do not believe that the exploration is in fact easier to play in swing. In fact I think it's harder. Possibly, for Salome it was "easier" because that was the feel that she was immersed in at the present time.

Salome mentioned to me, after her first playing of the exploration, that during the week her roommate had done for her exactly what I had – called out verbal cues at the end of each 4 bar cycle, signaling the return of the chord pattern. This could have contributed to her rapid assimilation of the rhythmic challenges of this exploration. Salome often found her own personal practice solutions in this manner beyond my own specific instructions as to how to practice a given assignment.

Her outburst, in lesson 16, - Tell that to my classical teacher!" (regarding what are and what are not ‘wrong’ notes) was both humorous and enlightening. Even at this late date, in our fourth month of working together, Salome was still aware of the strong influence that her classical training was having on her ability to experiment and expand her musically acceptable boundaries. I believe that she was progressing so admirably in this area by virtue of her willingness to take risks, even against her previous musical judgment, a characteristic that I had seen in Salome's playing almost from the first lessons. A wonderful example of this risk-taking and Salome's willingness (and ability) to respond positively to unexpected events in her playing, is seen in her first complete improvisation on this exploration in lesson 16.

When we began to work on playing over the transition between tonalities Salome's only success came when she mirrored the left hand's rhythmic pattern. This was to be expected, as she tackled first the coordination of the two hands working in unison. In fact, the success of this challenge would come as Salome developed an ever deeper kinesthetic sense of what it felt like to move through

this complex rhythmical moment. She began with mirroring. In the subsequent stages of this mastery she would have a small success (e.g. two eighth notes in a row in lesson 17) and then repeat it again and again until the new coordination was embedded in her bodily sensation. In lesson 18, she did the same with an entire one-bar motive, repeating it over and over in subsequent lines. Salome continually created an ever – widening comfort zone and her risk-taking, exhibited in her continuously stepping out of that comfort zone, is notable.

Her own initiative, in lesson 18, to foreshadow each key change in her improvisational line told me that Salome was succeeding in hearing the upcoming harmonic terrain as she in concert navigated the rhythmic challenges. In short, she was acquiring the crucial ability to relate to her improvisation on a variety of musical levels simultaneously.

During Salome's improvisation in lesson 18, I noticed for the first time something which would become another visual sign from Salome (like her giggling) signaling how she was responding to her emerging improvisation. As Salome played this exploration her body visually danced, expressing both her inner feel of the exploration's rhythm as well as subtle nuances in her improvisational lines. This was a new expression of Salome's extremely developed sense of rhythm which I had recognized in her first few lesson. It was also a visual expression of her phrasing and its directionality. It was truly remarkable.

The Melody in the Octave

In the first six lessons, Salome had developed several crucial improvisational habits at an astoundingly rapid speed. This, I believe, was in large part due to a gradual acceptance of her own inner musical sensibilities, her willingness (and courage) to move

beyond her rigid classical training, as well as a shift in her perspective regarding the issue of mistakes and her growing inclination to embrace and incorporate unexpected musical events in her improvisations. These habits would need to continually develop as Salome confronted the specific challenges of new referents. In addition, the expression of her unique improvisational voice would rely on the great strides she had made in the technical aspects of improvising: coordination of hands and sense of beat and time.

Salome's work in mastering the eight bar improvisation section of I Would've Called Her Sam, is a glimpse into the inner workings of Salome's process. Before even beginning to improvise on the piece for the first time Salome felt compelled to ask me for instructions. She wanted me to tell her how she should approach the task and what to play.

It became apparent in our first six lessons, that Salome came to this study with a solid, but basic grounding in music theory – major and minor scales, chords and arpeggios. In an improvisation on the eight bars of Sam with it's harmonically disjointed structure,, reliance on theoretical knowledge such as hers would, most likely express itself either in abundant use of chord tones or in an attempt to constantly switch scales as they relate to each changing chord. In the first improvisation, Salome not only paused to allow each left hand chord to sound alone, but also used almost exclusively chord tones. I realized that she was relying first on her theoretical knowledge to make sense of this challenge. She may also have chosen this approach as a way to keep the hands in sync – to mentally make the connection between what her left hand was doing and what her right hand was improvising. (In our first several months of lessons, Salome often reverted back to this approach when encountering a new improvisational referent, including her own compositions.)

However, as soon as I pointed this out to her she courageously abandoned this crutch in her second improvisation, playing linear phrases, as well as forcing herself to confront the difficulty of coordination of playing both hands simultaneously on the first beat of each bar. Just this one small request – play on the '1' – was noticeably significant in moving Salome away from a calculated theoretical approach. As she attempted to succeed with this additional challenge of joining hands on the first beat, Salome naturally chose notes of closer proximity, rather than leaping to an arpeggio appropriate note. This was the beginning of focusing her hearing on lyrical lines. It appears, however, that Salome was not yet capable of hearing lines that weave through the chord changes, as exhibited by the fact that though I only asked her to make sure that she played a note on each chord change she did not create lines that incorporate that first beat but rather played continuously, as if to make sure a note would be sounding on each '1'.

The real leap in ability came after a week of practicing the improvisation within an octave. In improvisation #3 of that lesson, it was apparent that Salome was hearing ahead – prehearing the transition of her melodic line into a new harmonic center. It is also clear that she had begun to rely on inner audiation of her musical phrases as the basis of her improvisation. This is not only reflected in several significant musical achievements (discussed above) but is, in my opinion, responsible for them. Once Salome had allowed her ear to direct her improvisation rather than just her theoretical knowledge she began to respond to the emergent qualities of her phrases, creating motive development and beautifully creative asymmetrical phrasing. There is a clear directionality to her phrases, a cohesive sound that weaves through a number of chord changes, and Salome has finally discovered (though perhaps unwittingly) the crucial element of space. In fact, if one is familiar with the piece and merely sings Salome's improvisation, one can hear the harmonies reflected beneath Salome's improvisational lines.

In her final improvisation, Salome used a variety of transitional techniques to control the directionality of her musical lines. She had become increasingly secure in relying on her ear and her own musical sensibilities. In four lessons, she had gone from an overwhelming confusion in response to a multitude of apparently disparate chords to hearing and creating lyrical connection that cohesively connect the entire eight bar section.

In Dulce Jubilo: Organic Unity part I: Song & Solo

With Guy, I had moved directly from work on I Would've Called Her Sam to work on Twins. There were a variety of reasons that I chose to work with Salome on this piece before turning our focus to Twins…

(1)It had become clear to me that Salome's strength lay in her superb rhythmic sensibilities and that if she had a weaker area it was in her sensitivity to harmonies and harmonic palettes. This was, in fact, the opposite of Guy and perhaps reflects not only Guy's considerably deeper immersion in popular music styles but also his concurrent studies in popular composition. Salome had been, and still was, immersed in the classical world and her studies of theory and harmony were of a basic classical nature. (This will be discussed further in the Conclusions section.) That rhythmic strength, perhaps, is what encouraged Salome to tend toward groove-based improvisations, even on slower tunes. I decided that it would be advantageous to continue a bit longer with slow tempo compositions allowing Salome to explore harmonic possibilities without the demands of a groove-based improvisation.

(2)To this point we had worked on pieces who's form was a traditional jazz form of presentation of head – solo on form of piece – recapitulation of head. Based on my work with Guy, I believed it would be advantageous to introduce Salome to less conventional forms as well. In this piece the solo section is a distinct section of the piece which presents an additional level of interpretation on the part of the artist. (This introduction to non-conventional forms would be particularly influential to Salome in her original compositions, as will be discussed in the chapter Using Original Compositions as Referents.

(3)The incorporation of this unique solo section in the course of the performance would allow Salome to focus her attention not only on the specific demands of each section but on creating an organic unity from beginning to end. The simplicity of the solo section, I believed, would afford her that more global attention.

(4)Over the previous several months Salome had found less and less time to work at home on our material. This was due to the fact that she had decided to begin work toward a double major in classical piano and conducting. The burden of a double load of courses made her time limited and she even began to periodically cancel lessons because of upcoming tests at school or an overload of homework in her classes. The issue of missed lesson was a noticeable disruption to our continuum of work as it presented gaps between assigned tasks and their actual attention in subsequent lessons. Whereas with Guy we often worked on a given piece for months, it became apparent to me that my work with Salome would be more productive if we

worked on repertoire pieces with one specific focus and for not more than one month.

I came to understand that this apparent drawback, if related to correctly, could give me a unique view into Salome's learning processes. I would suggest that, given that she was accomplishing only a small amount of work between lessons, these three improvisations reflected both Salome's instantaneous responses to the challenges presented and a pulling together of all of the skills we had worked on to date.

Already from the first improvisation, it is apparent that Salome has acquired an independence of hands and the ability to juxtapose rhythmic complexity in the right with a steady pattern in the left. It is also apparent that Salome has acquired the ability to hear and create in extended phrases, phrases that present a clear directionality. I would suggest that it is possible to conclude that as Salome plays through each of her phrases she is pre-hearing the arrival at the next harmonic center. This is proven, I believe, by the cadential sound of her phrase endings.

From the first improvisation through to the third, Salome worked through several specific challenges – all self determined. The first is her choice of melodic palettes.Salome used mainly pentatonic modes in her first improvisation and I would suggest that this is consistent with her initial confrontation with most new material throughout our work together. By the second improvisation, she has significantly expanded her choice of palettes and explores the unusual use of C natural over the D suspended chords. Whereas in the first improvisation the sound of this note caught her off guard (she giggled), by the second improvisation she has made it a central part of her creating distinction of color between the various sections of the improvisation. She emphasizes this distinction even more by making specific and frequent use of the note C# in the

sections of the solo that are based on B and A chords and C natural in the sections based on Dsus. Building on this success, in the final improvisation she adds the additional element of poly-chords which we had worked on in the G Song.

Salome is also seen here exploring the element of ambiguity. It is interesting that whereas in the first improvisation where all of her cadential phrases (moments of returning to Dsus) ended on chord tones – D, F#, or A – in the second improvisation, half of Salome's phrases end on non-chord tones, expressing an element of ambiguity. It is appropriate that also in this improvisation Salome experiments with alternating between a major tonic and a minor tonic – another expression of ambiguity.

The last improvisation was a wonderful culmination of this learning process in which Salome succeeded in creating a highly organic sounding connection between the presentation of the song's melody and her own improvisation. She is not only audiating her own improvisational ideas and approaching harmonic terrain but is simultaneously audiating the original melody and form of the piece, as proven in the way that she seamlessly integrates a quote of that melody in her improvisation (with an ingenious rhythmic shift).

It appears that there is still an element of exploration in this improvisation as well as seen in the fact that for the first time Salome attempts a very fast out of time line (bars 32-33). The line is successfully executed but causes her to temporarily lose the left hand pattern, fail to move to the upcoming chord of B, and plays one bar in 4/4 meter. She quickly gets back on track.

We did encounter an issue which had been under our continued attention – the use of sustain pedal and its influence on phrasing and articulation. In lesson 22, when I asked Salome to play one improvisation with limited use of the sustain pedal, it created a noticeable disruption in her improvisational abilities. This told me that Salome not only needed to continue working on the variety of

articulations available to her but, more importantly, she needed to continue to work toward becoming comfortable with the role of silence and space in her improvising.

Twins: Organic Unity part II: Disparate Sections

Though we worked on this composition for only three lessons, Salome's progress in improvising on the piece was quite impressive. At the start (lesson 27) Salome was continually unsuccessful in even navigating the form of the piece. By breaking the composition down into smaller units and focusing on the specific demands of each, she was able to bring into play many of the skills that she had acquired in our previous lessons and utilize them on isolated challenges.

In our second lesson on the piece, I had Salome put two pieces of the puzzle back together. This slightly larger unit was still small enough that she was able to listen and respond to the emergent qualities of her improvisation as seen in her experimentation with the note D flat and her use of motivic development. Salome had already become comfortable with each unit from our work in loops and this new challenge encouraged her to begin to hear in longer organic phrases. And by the third lesson Salome was not only able to reconstruct the entire puzzle but, thanks to our intensive work in loops, she was able to simultaneously construct a unique musical personality for each section in her improvisation. I would further suggest that beyond exhibiting control of musical elements in these various sections, Salome was in fact hearing and recognizing the musical personality emergent from the harmony of each section (and the original melody on which each section was based) and responding in realtime to that recognition.

As regards our work in 'loops' – I believe that the use of this technique was a major factor in Salome's quick success with this

piece. It is a particularly useful technique for mastery of localized challenges. Improvising over the same 4 or 8 bars in a loop allows the student to explore and experiment on specific moments in the improvisation in a continuous stream. It allows the student to build on each success, remember previous musical ideas, and develop a deep understanding of the unique character of a specific improvisational moment, something which is not as available when that moment is returned to only after many bars of improvisation on other distinct sections.

It is certain that had we stayed with this piece for many more weeks Salome's improvisation would have taken on ever deepening levels of musical sophistication and exploitation of harmonic and melodic possibilities. However, we had developed an important artistic habit – hearing and improvising organic unity in compositions built of distinct sections. This artistic habit is at the center of jazz improvisation.

Learning to Swing

I had been happy and surprised, in lesson 12, to see how quickly and naturally Salome took to several key elements of swing playing in her original composition, Daydream. Though her actual rhythmic feel was an old school one, I believed that these musical sensibilities (particularly rhythmic phrasing) would serve her well when we actually began intensive work on contemporary swing feel. Salome had told me in a previous lesson that she liked to listen to jazz and this perhaps accounted not only for her innate sensitivity toward swing feel but her old school take on the style as well. Despite the fact that, generally, swing feel is an extremely foreign sense of timing to classical musicians, I might suggest that Salome's highly developed sense of rhythm, as exhibited in all of the rhythmic challenges we had tackled to date, was here again a tremendous asset toward her success.

However, this original composition was extremely complex harmonically and, given Salome's improvisational abilities at the time she brought it, would not have been an appropriate starting point for swing study. The process by which I introduced both Guy and Salome to swing feel began with harmonically sparse referents. This allowed for total focus on the sound and finger-sensation of this somewhat unconventional style of playing, without the distraction of needing to navigate complex harmonic changes. (The reader will remember that when Guy began work on the more harmonically complicated swing piece, Everybody’s Song But My Own, he became primarily involved in the harmonic complexity and lost the swing feel he had acquired in a previously more static piece. I did not want the same thing to happen to Salome and so we avoided, for the most part, improvising on this original composition.)

Trying to achieve all of the qualities of a natural swing feel in three weeks time was unrealistic, and in fact was never the goal of these few lessons. However, Salome honestly astounded me with her quick grasp of this complex sense of timing and her ability to exhibit this in her playing. In one week I had thrown at her such concepts as laid back feel, back beat accented eighth note lines, and flat handed non legato articulation. It was no wonder that by the second lesson her own playing was "laying back" in such an exaggerated fashion as she struggled to assimilate all of these foreign ideas of playing.

My decision to move our work to the format of a simple 12-bar blues and accompany her myself was, in retrospect, a pivotal decision. While Salome had been struggling to play with the recordings she had needed to compete with a barrage of musical information coming from the "band" and I suspect that this had been a bit overwhelming and perhaps tension producing. When pared down to a simple piano accompaniment (which was right there on the same

instrument as she was playing on) Salome herself immediately felt (and expressed) how much easier the task was.

I found it fascinating that, despite the fact that Salome had never played blues (and did not even know what the harmonic progressions were that I was using to accompany her), she naturally created musically meaningful phrases these first improvisations. I believe that her ability to listen to the musical environment and respond, a skill that we had worked on throughout this process, was directly responsible for this success. Even in this foreign musical terrain, Salome succeeded in hearing the distinct musical environment and the emergent ideas in her own improvisational lines, responding to and developing those ideas. This is evident in her use of the mixolydian mode in each of her blues improvisations (tracks ?+?), as well as motivic development (e.g. bars 21-23, and 33-34 in her blues improvisation in F).

A particularly astounding moment in this lesson was when Salome told me that she believed that, had she transcribed Dexter Gordon's solo herself, her learning would have been made considerably easier and more helpful for our task at hand. What in fact this remark revealed was that Salome had become aware of the crucial influence of audiation – first hand inner hearing - on her improvisational abilities. Given that our process was first and foremost a process of building artistic habits, this was a thrilling moment for me to witness.

The Use of Original Compositions as Referents

The advantages of allowing the student to develop his personal improvisational voice using original compositions as well as

teacher-chosen referents has been briefly discussed in, Toward a Philosophy and Pedagogy of Personal Voice. There it was pointed out that composing and improvising on original compositions during the course of improvisational studies (1) allows the student to explore his voice before being asked to accommodate that voice within the restrictions of another artist's musical creation, (2) encourages the student to draw on his contemporary personal experience, harmonizing that experience with his improvisational voice, and (3) allows the student to choose his own direction of musical development and expression.

In addition to these valuable pedagogical advantages, the use of original compositions in this study exposed two additional focuses, both which were refreshingly surprising. First, as Guy and Salome grappled with the concepts and skills of learning to improvise and developing their individual approaches to the lesson material, each of them used their original compositions – perhaps unconsciously - as an additional arena in which to confront and master the issues that we dealt with in the lessons (e.g. harmonic or rhythmic challenges from a given lesson or set of lessons found expression in an original composition). Second, a chronological survey of the compositions written by each student presents an additional and exciting view of their creative development from classical pianist to improvising jazz musician with a distinctive personal voice.

Lastly, often the complexity of the original compositions were beyond the improvisational abilities of the student at the time. Rather than posing a difficulty this was, I believe, a significant catalyst in the learning process. Each student appeared to have a vested interest – an additional element of motivation - in succeeding in the total performance of his/her original composition and tackled the challenges presented with great energy. In other words, the personal motivation that came with mastering their original compositions contributed significantly to the mastery of skills worked on in repertoire materials.

Guy

Guy's first composition, Piano Love, is in a recognizably classical style and even contains a cadenza-like section. Guy even put the classical terms con moto at the beginning of the 'A' section and meno mosso at the outset of the rubato candenza section. It is written in AAB form and the melody is presented in a fluid legato style with sustain pedal throughout, as is the improvisation. The piece is written in the tonality of C minor. According to Guy this was his first attempt at an instrumental composition (he had written songs in the past). It clearly shows the strong influence of his classical starting point in our process. It also shows a strong basis in classical harmony as well as an initial willingness to step outside those boundaries and experiment with unconventional chord progressions. The melody line of this composition tends to meander with little motivic connection between phrases – a bit of a reflection of Guy's initial approach to improvising as well. The most important contribution that work on this piece made to Guy's journey of improvisation was the focus on use of the pedal and variations of articulation available without pedal.

Guy wrote his second composition. Love Come Anger, after we had worked for several weeks on the piece Twins. In regard to that piece, we focused a considerable amount of attention to groove playing and began to discuss the jazz progression: II – V – I. In Twins, Guy was exposed to a variety of non-classical harmonic progressions and we spent much of our time working on finding the lyrical thread that connects disparateharmonies. Love Come Anger has an atmosphere of exploration as Guy experiments withand learns to control a variety of new harmonic, melodic and rhythmic ideas we had touched on in our lessons. It is considerably

more rhythmic than Piano Love making frequent use of syncopated phrases. Here Guy also experiments with the II – V – Iprogression and it's various permutations (e.g. tritone substitutions). In addition, Guy's harmonic freedom and willingness to probe new harmonic relations is apparentthroughout the piece. Several examples of this are the manner in which he slides into a new tonality rather than arriving at the new center through traditional progressions (see bars 5-7 and 11-15). The existence of an underlying tonic is masked as Guy finds ingenious ways to create lyrical melodic connections that weave through theunconventional chord appearances. The piece is written in AABA form and it is interesting that, like Twins, both the A and the B sections of the piece end with a common 'hook'. During the period that this piece was written, we were working on the partnership between left hand and right and had worked on creating left hand parts that compliment right hand improvisations. Whereas in Piano Love (composition #1) the left hand had been arranged in an endless series of arpeggios, often overpowering the right hand lines, here the left hand part not only more balanced with the right but is chosen quite carefully to provide the crucial harmonic and rhythmic elements. We had also begun working on different articulation possibilities and the melody here shows attention to a variety of different styles of articulation.

Guy's third piece, Journey, written in ABA form (lesson 21), shows a more cohesive use of jazz harmony elements. Here Guy appears to be less exploring (as he did in Love Comes Anger) and more organically designing the harmonic and melodic elements of the piece. There are hints of a classical sensibility beautifully meshed with a jazz sound and feel. The piece demonstrates a wonderfully creative use of the II – V – I concept. In this piece Guy also pays particular attention to the issue of motive development as well as moments of harmonic transitions and how those moments are reflected in the melodic line. These are both issues which we devoted considerable time to in the lessons during this period. The

melody illustrates a clear central motive (mainly rhythmic) which Guy creatively varies throughout the piece giving it a completely new sound from section 'A' to section 'B'.

The G pedal point in the first three bars of the melody each time it is presented is reminiscent of the pedal points that begin each of the two sections in Twins. Guy also uses a variety of different styles of left hand accompaniment to the melody, a topic which engaged us for many lessons in regard to improvising. The moment of transition between the G minor based 'A' part and the D major based 'B' part is particularly noteworthy as Guy uses the major construction of the tonic (G Major) and the enharmonic note f# to move the melody smoothly to this distant tonal region. I believe it possible that Guy got the idea for creating a piece in two sections with widely distant tonal centers from our work on Exploration in Fourths.

Stations (composition #4 – lesson 30) was written while we were working intensely on Kenny Wheeler's piece, Everybody's Song But My Own, and so it is not surprising that it is written in 3/4 time. Guy appears to be using this composition to explore and experiment with the possibilities of this time signature. In addition, there is frequent use of melody notes tied over the barline – a key characteristic of Mindiatyr, which we had begun work on three weeks earlier. Mindiatyr is also in 3/4 time but with a noticeably different feel and rhythmic approach from Kenny Wheeler's tune. Guy creates two main motives which he uses as the basis of the melody development – one for the 'A' section and one for the 'B' section – giving each section a distinctive personality. (The issue of distinctive personality of different sections of a piece and how to reflect that in an improvisation had received considerable attention in our work both on Twins and Everybody's Song But My Own.) As in Love Comes Anger, Guy closes each section with a common 'hook'.

This composition is simpler, harmonically, than Guy's three previous compositions and is meant to be played with straight eighths. When Guy first brought this piece to lesson it was almost completely devoid of syncopations and he played it in a quite pedantic 1-2-3 rhythm. We used the composed melody of the piece as fertile ground to explore and investigate the rich rhythmic variations available in a 3/4 meter as we had in the Kenny Wheeler piece. We worked with the melody as written and searched for ways to disguise the 3/4 feel by adding syncopations, anticipations, and quartolas. It was interesting that in improvising on this piece Guy had the same difficulties that he was having with the Kenny Wheeler piece – he could not detach himself from a literal 3/4 feel and be free in his right hand improvisations.

Guy's fifth composition, Birth, came in lesson 33. The moment that he played it for me I was aware that with this composition we had moved into a new level of expression of personal voice. Gone were the noticeable borrowings from our repertoire pieces and the underlying quality of trying-things-out that had characterized Guy's previous pieces. Birth has the sound of a personal musical statement. Guy has taken all of the many musical elements that we had been dealing with for 8 months and melded them into a truly personal expression. The form of the piece is A (10 bars) + A (13 bars), each section containing a different ending. Guy's distinctive take on harmonic relations, which he developed during our work together, finds ultimate expression in the numerous idiosyncratic chord patterns which he uses. The first 17 bars reveal a harmony built on pairs of chords descending by half steps (e.g. Em7 – Ebmaj7; Gm7 – Gbmaj7; F7sus – Em7, etc). The ending of A2 is equally distinctive as Guy uses a quasi jazz descending bassnote progression, followed by a deceptive II – V cadence, and an intriguing and surprising arrival at the final tonic of Ebmaj7 by way of Ebm7 and Emaj7.

Birth's main melodic motive is only 4 notes long but developed beautifully throughout the piece, both rhythmically and melodically. The melodic line creates a lyrical thread that weaves through the disparate harmonies. Guy achieves this by making brilliant use of enharmonic tones in the melody (e.g. bars 1-4: D over Em7 then over Ebmaj7; bars 6-7: leading from Gm7 into Gbmaj7 with a Gm7 arpeggio, the m7th - F - of Gm7 becoming the +7 of Gbmaj7; and bars 20-22: Ab over Gbmaj7, Ebm7, and Emaj7). Another exquisite moment in the piece comes in bar 17. The previous arrival at Gbmaj7 (bar 7) with F in the melody line had not hinted at any change of modal direction but had immediately returned to the original mode (g minor). In bar 17, the arrival at Gbmaj7 signals a transition into Db major which continues to the last bar of the piece when we arrive, through the enharmonic melody note – Ab – at Ebmaj7.

Rhythmically Guy subtly disguising the 6/8 meter as he alternates the accented notes in the bars, creating alternately: (1) 6/8 feel; (2) 3/2 feel (bars 7-8); 2/2 feel (bar 17), and 3/4 feel (bar 20). It should be noted that Guy's improvisations on this piece had a fluidity and freshness that were among his most expressive (cd track X).

Five weeks after we began working on Herbie Hancock's Driftin' Guy brought his last composition, 13 Bar Blues to his lesson (lesson 42). Hancock's piece had been a medium tempo swing piece in a big band style and this piece is reminiscent of that style. However, if Birth had marked the "birth" of Guy's contemporary personal jazz voice, 13 Bar Blues showed how that voice might uniquely express itself in direct reference to traditional jazz elements.

The piece has 3 distinct lines, as in traditional 12 bar blues, the first two being a repetition of similar material and the third being distinctively new. However, in Guy's blues form, a clever rhythmic shift (bar 4) creates an overlap of the initial two phrases, truncating them to 7 bars, rather than 8. The third phrase is elongated from the traditional 4 bars to 6 bars by a

continuous sequence of syncopated pickup notes leading to each subsequent bar. (Another interesting rhythmic shift forms a central element in this phrase as well - eighth note + 16th note triplet figure in bars 10, 11, and 12.) The first two phrases center around an Ab tonality while the third phrase moves to new harmonic material. All of these elements combine to create a piece that reflects a blues sound but with a contemporary twist.

Guy develops three separate melodic motives simultaneously: (1) two 16th notes + an eighth note, that begin the piece; (2) two syncopated eighth note pickup notes; and (3) and eighth note + 16th note triplet figure. He uses the underlying mode of Ab major to create a melodic thread that weaves through a series of relative or distant harmonies. Again we see the use of chords descending by half steps as Guy's builds the harmonic progressions of the piece. One might actually claim that in this composition Guy has made a successful attempt at signifin(g) 5on the traditional blues style.

Several times throughout our work together, Guy brought other compositions to lesson, often pieces that he was composing for a particular course at the music academy. We would spend time in the lesson discussing the compositional aspects of the piece but did not use them as basis for improvisation.

Regarding the improvisational form of each of his compositions, Guy consistently chose to improvise on the entire form of each piece (though we did speak about the possibility of creating a distinct section for improvisation). I believe this was germane to Guy's approach to these compositions as an additional forum in which to explore and practice the many musical ideas that we were working on in lesson.

5 The term signifyin(g) was coined by Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Signifyin(g) often takes the form of quoting from subcultural vernacular, while extending the meaning at the same time through a rhetorical figure. In jazz, signifyin(g) is a way of showing reverence for a past style or specific composition while, at the same time, bringing to it a new interpretation.

Salome

Like Guy, Salome had never before composed instrumental music. Unlike Guy, she had never composed at all. The first time I asked her to bring an original piece to the lesson she gave me a look of confusion. I told her it didn't need to be a masterpiece. It could be something very simple and short.

The first piece that Salome composed (lesson 7) was Maybe Not. The influence of the Shifting Chords exploration is immediately apparent. The harmonies move repetitively in major seconds and until the last three bars there are only three distinct chords – Bb major 7, C major 7 , and D minor 7. The song is composed in A A B A2 form. Salome uses a short, 4 beat, rhythmic motive as the material for in the A sections and a second motive for the B section. In A2 she creates a nice dramatic build by shortening the initial motive to 2 beats and repeating it more frequently. The last three bars of the piece present an unexpected turn of musical events with the addition of two new chords played behind the original motive and ending on tonic in a semi-resolving construction – C major #11.

In composing this piece Salome created for herself a more extended exploration of the possibilities of Shifting Chords exploration. In lesson 9, the fact that she knew the melody intimately, having composed it herself, came to the fore. Salome quoted and borrowed elements of that melody during her improvisation. This would become something that she gradually incorporated in her improvisations on repertoire compositions as well.

Work on this piece also allowed us to do some intense work on out of time playing. Again, because Salome was intimately familiar with all of the aspects of the piece she was free to focus on her feeling of time.

After one lesson that we had worked on this piece, Salome wrote the following in her notebook and shared it with me at the next lesson…

"The process of improvising and also composing is making me think more about smaller details of the music that I play – classical music. Why the rhythm is a certain way, how it changes from one place to another; understanding (well not only understanding but also feeling) harmonies differently."

Salome brought her second composition, Daydream, in lesson 12. Before she played it for me she explained that during the week her roommate had taught her a jazz standard, On Green Dolphin Street. She complained to him that she had a "composing block" and his suggestion was to learn some new pieces and see if they inspired her. After she played her composition I asked her if her roommate had explained the harmony of the standard to her and she said no he just taught it to her. Then she said, "Why? Do you think their connected?" I laughed and said, "Uh, yah!

At that point, I asked her to play the jazz standard for me. She appeared to have learned it like a classical piece – memorized what was written on the page without really understanding the harmony. She did say that her roommate had pointed out the repeating II – V patterns in the piece. We investigated the harmony of her piece a little and Salome told me that, as she composed it, she had followed what she was hearing in her head.

I found it extremely fascinating that this classically trained pianist had written such a well composed jazz standard-like composition. Salome had told me previously that when she was growing up her parents had played jazz music in the house. Perhaps that had influenced her but I found it difficult to imagine that the intricate

harmonic progressions and jazz-like melody was inspired by things she had heard years ago. I asked her again about her exposure to jazz and she told me that, in fact, she often listens to jazz on her own and had learned the words to several standards which she likes to sing while her roommate plays them at the piano. It became progressively clear that Salome was exploring all of these jazz influences she had experienced in this new composition.

Beyond the harmonic intricacies of the piece, the melody is beautifully constructed around the development of several motives. Salome uses a characteristically jazz melodic technique – melodic sequences – to create a melody that organically weaves through the constantly shifting harmonic centers of the two extended ii –V – I passages (bars 9-16, and 21-24). Again, a surprising turn of musical events arrives in the last three bars as Salome uses a unique jazz progression built on descending thirds: Eb – C minor – Ab – F minor – Db. The piece is written in A B A2 B2 form. It is a stunning composition. (The work that we did on improvisation with this piece is detailed above in the chapter Learning to Swing.)

Salome only brought her next original composition in lesson 25. As opposed to Guy who continually bombarded me with new compositions and appeared to relish the opportunity to explore what he had learned in a more personal way with his own compositions, Salome waited for me to ask for original pieces and several times when I did she still devoted her practicing to the weekly improvisational tasks leaving the issue of composition on the side.

In lesson 25, Salome brought me her third composition, Monsoon Blues. Immediately upon hearing it, I was aware that this piece was of a different level and stature than Salome's previous two piece. There was a refreshingly new and unique sound to all elements of the piece, the beginning rumblings of a personal voice. I asked Salome where it had come

from. She explained that in the previous week there had a been a bombing in her hometown of Bombay and gave me a short history of the conflict there. She told me that she had been depressed for several days and then, "I just sat down and it came out. All the other songs I wrote for you I had trouble getting it down. This one I had no trouble!"

Monsoon Blues is written in a loose A A2 B A3 form. It has a distinctly ethnic sound as Salome employs unconventional modes such as C minor flat 9 as the basis for the initial melody and freely juxtaposes a C minor tonic with a C major tonic. Salome uses motivic development which we worked on in the G Song and The Ground as she transposes and transforms her original motive over a variety of chord progressions and in a variety of tonalities. She artfully makes use of poly-harmonies such as Db over Cm and Bbm over Cm. The recapitulation of the initial minor melody in C major (A3) is nothing short of a moment of optimism. Salome finishes the melody on the note A leaving an air of unresolve hanging in the musical air.

Salome's melodic phrasing in this piece also exhibited a new freedom from her classical roots. After an 8 bar intro, she introduces the 'A' section which is comprised of two phrases of 6 bars each and one phrase of 7 bars. In the 'B' section she returns to a symmetrical form with each of the four phrases being 4 bars in length, however the return to the original melody in 'A3' is again and asymmetrical phrase of 10 bars. There are many instances of motivic development throughout the melody of the piece and Salome even used a construction of fourths similar to our Exploration in Fourths several times to enhance the melody.

Particularly noteworthy is the fact that in this composition, for the first time, Salome creates a distinct section for improvisation (as opposed to improvising on the form of the piece as she did in her two previous compositions). The improvisation took a shape similar to that of Bugge Wesseltoft's In Dolce Jubilo with three alternating

chords. Those chords are, in fact, a reduction down to the two tonal centers of the piece – Cm and F - and the addition of Eb. All chords are notated 'without third' allowing for a wonderful ambiguity as to the quality of these tonics – major or minor.

As we worked on this composition, Salome gradually developed a haunting ostinato in the left hand which she chose to use to accompany all of the 'A' sections. She artfully transposed this ostinato to various locations in the octave creating an overall unity of sound to the entire composition. She created a second minimalistic ostinato to accompany the improvisation. Salome gave a particularly inspired performance of this piece in lesson 29 which can be heard on the accompanying cd, track XX.

Salome's last original composition was The Dream which she brought in lesson 27. At that time she had only written the first 8 bars and chord harmonies for the next 8 bars. The piece is written in 6/8 time and this gave us the opportunity to discuss the creative metric possibilities available when using this time signature.

By the next lesson Salome had completely the piece, written in and it now had an A – B – solo – A form. She had also composed a 7 bar introduction during which she plays with the various interpretations of a 6/8 feel and sets the tone for a similar playful ambiguity in the melody of the piece. This theme of ambiguity presents itself throughout the piece as Salome appears to consciously avoid ending melodic phrases on chord related tones. In fact, throughout most of the melody she makes extensively use of tensions (e.g. 9, major 7, etc.) giving the composition a "dream-like" quality (hence the name?). She even ends the composition on an A9 chord rather than the tonic E and the final melody note is an F#. As in her first composition, Maybe Not, Salome used pairs of chords for the basis of the piece's harmony: E9 and A9, C major7

and Bb major7, and Eb major7 and D7#9. All sections make extended use of motivic development.

Remembering back six months earlier to Salome's starting point characterized by exclusively symmetrical phrasing and phrases always ending on a tonic chord tone, these last two compositions were a revelation of how Salome had embraced a new sense of freedom from conventional structures and considerably expanded her sonic sensibilities.

Conclusions

I had set out to discover a model by which I might help students begin to develop their personal voice in jazz improvisation. It was clear to me that this process could, and would likely continue beyond the two years of this study for each of the participants. My own journey to find a personal voice in jazz took me a decade. In fact, my own history in regards to this process was a main motivation for this research. At the time that I made the transition from classical pianist to jazz, my first assumption was that I needed to learn the accepted jazz systems in order to 'sound like a jazz player' and the few teachers that I studied with taught me just that. The result was that for several years, when I performed jazz, I had the distinct feeling – "this is not the real me". Only four or five

years into the process I realized that what I essentially wanted was to find 'how I sound in jazz'. Looking back, I wholeheartedly believe that this personal search was exacerbated by the difficulty of detaching myself enough from these learned systems to hear that personal voice. This study was my attempt to help these two students travel a more organic path to theirs.

The process of discovery and development of personal voice in my work with the students of this study was aided by several pedagogical ideals. First, I considered it essential that the student be involved in a process of continually expanding his/her comfort zone. In fact, this process is a vertical process, not a horizontal one. Expansion of comfort zones involves a deepening of the distinctive musical world of the student, aiding him/her in discovery of new elements of his/her personal voice which may be hidden below the surface, instinctive first response. Second, I committed to helping the student acquire the ability to listen responsively to the emergent qualities of his/her playing in all parameters – to 'pay attention'. Third, I saw as one of my prime tasks, to empower the student to make conscious musical choices in all parameters and to take responsibility for those musical choices. All of these points influenced and inspired by interventions throughout the study. And finally, was the conviction that musical expression must be a kinesthetic experience, not just an aural or intellectual one. This ideal played a central role in work on Exploration in Fourths, learning swing feel, and in work on exhibiting the shape of phrases with the movement of the hands ("dancing" with the fingers).

It is clear from the chapters detailed above that I brought to this study certain aesthetic ideals, and though aesthetic ideals must, by definition, contain an element of subjectivity, I believe that those ideals which influenced my work in this study form a consensus which would not be considered overly subjective. First, I worked under the premise that musical organization begins with attention to grouping (e.g. phrasing). We hear motives, phrases, in our heads, not random collections of notes. Many of my interventions

and explorations were designed to encourage the student to discover his/her unique sense of lyricism (e.g. asking Guy to improvise with single notes in both hands – lesson 6; motive work on the G Song and The Ground; improvising inside an octave; and, of course, singing while improvising).

The second element of my aesthetic ideal was that organic unity, not a predetermined form, is the underlying structure in musical expression. A musical statement, when possessing an organic unity, dictates its own form, its own musical 'sense', whether in improvisation or composition. This ideal necessitates the development of the ability to listen responsively and inspired such assignments as: repeated motives in the G Song and other compositions, and the expanded G Song.

In hindsight, I would suggest that the pedagogical ideals mentioned above kept a check on these aesthetic ideals. They allowed for what might have begun as a personal, slightly subjective, aesthetic to be molded by the student into his/her personal voice.

Beyond these pedagogical and aesthetic ideals, I came to this study with a commitment to leaving myself open to listen and respond to the emergent qualities of my students and their distinctive voices, allowing what I heard to direct the process and my own interventions. I was surprised at the tremendous amount of focus and energy that this demanded of me. We, as teachers, slide easily into the posture of 'teaching what we know'. And to my additional surprise – our students slide easily into the posture of 'teach me'. The delicate balance between accompanying the student on his journey of discovery and knowing how and when to offer suggestions or musical information, demand of the "teacher" not only a highly developed capacity to listen but a not small measure of integrity and humility. It also demands, I believe, the adoption of a holistic approach to the process and to each student. The dozens of conversations that I had with these students, whether short topical ones or deeply intense ones, were, without a doubt, a

central element of the learning process. Through those conversation, the students (and I) came to understand the act of improvisation in direct relation to the totality of a person and, in order for this understanding to begin, I was called upon to share in these (and many other) conversations the totality of my own improvisational self.

Though a deeper examination of how I changed as a teacher in the course of this study must be reserved for a future paper, it must be said that I came to understand that a teacher is, more than anything, a virtuoso listener. As I struggled with the demands of being an 'attentive observer', I began to recognize at every turn, in every playing of a note, a world of pedagogical knowledge waiting to be uncovered and understood. I realized how much, until now, I had engaged in "teaching what I know". As a result, during the two years of this study, my teaching methods in other areas of music underwent a re-evaluation as I consciously worked to transform all of my teaching environments according to this study's "improvised reflective - responsive" model. The results have greatly influenced how I teach.

The transition from the classical world to the jazz world is not an easy one and, in this regard, the hurdles and challenges that these two students encountered were many. They were asked to re-evaluate their understanding of what makes harmonic sense, learn a new sense of time and timing, develop a new tactile approach to the keyboard, and step beyond learned constructs toward ever-widening understandings of phrasing and form. The immense challenge of these tasks notwithstanding, they all fall, I believe, into the category of 'building blocks', the necessary skills and habits which must be in place in order to succeed at the ultimate challenge – improvising. Moving from a classical mindset to an improvising mindset is far more than the acquisition of new skills and learning a "new language". It is, I believe, a fundamental

shift in how we view music, music making, and our relationship to the act of music making.

The first stage of that shift, I would suggest, is in embracing the 'unknown'. Both Guy and Salome grappled with feeling comfortable and creating within a musical space where they did not know what would happen next – they were not told what to play. In this new musical space, instructions from the score (or teacher) were replaced by listening and responding in realtime. This transition cannot happen all at once, but must be tackled step by step, balancing structure ("given") with freedom ("unknown"). The use of the various ostinatos, our work with pre-planned motives, and the many discussions regarding the elements of the material were, I believe, central to Guy and Salome's establishing a comfortable and creative relationship with the 'unknown'.

The second stage of the shift is taking responsibility for one's musical choices in all parameters. It is a process of empowering the student to trust his personal voice. Rather than rely on others' interpretations of a given compositional score, Guy and Salome underwent a process in which they learned to accept responsibility for every note that was played, were empowered to make their own distinct musical choices, from left hand chord harmonies to right hand improvisational lines. The fact that these choices happen in realtime is of huge consequence as it demanded of these students to be so thoroughly familiar with the building blocks of a composition that those musical choices might happen on a variety of levels simultaneously.

The final stage of the shift is, in my opinion, built on the two previous stages, yet qualitatively different. It is the stage in which the student begins to experience music as an aural, ethereal (even at times elusive) medium, as opposed to a visual (on the page) or mental (theoretically calculated) one. It is that moment in which the student begins to "live in the space" of the music, dialoguing

with the emergent qualities of sound present. This transition was accomplished, I believe, much to the credit of continual work on the G Song. A beautiful example of this transition in action was seen in both Guy and Salome's work on the ballad, I Would've Called Her Sam. Both began their improvisational work on this piece glued to the page, calculating appropriate chords and scales. Within a few short lessons, they abandoned their classical mode of relating and began to "live in the space" of the ballad, hearing and expressing the musical possibilities of that distinct environment. This ability to "live in the space" grew throughout the many months of work to the point where it became their instinctive response to new pieces.

It is clear to me that my work with these students was influenced by their parallel studies at the Jerusalem Academy of Music & Dance – each in a distinct direction. The process of developing a personal voice in improvisation does not take place in a vacuum. Just as the student draws on all of his/her prior musical experiences in the development of that voice, so they draw on, and are influenced by, their continued musical experiences and the richness of their musical environment can be a key factor to their success in this process.

Conclusions from this study imply that it might be worthwhile to rethink the construct of more comprehensive jazz curricula and explore ways in which the overall curriculum might be restructured so as encourage personal voice, e.g. beginning studies with courses that encourage exploration and experimentation, building artistic habits and self efficacy, and only afterward introducing specific improvisational systems. Future research might also investigate whether the model presented here could be equally applicable in a group setting.

Additionally, constructing a comprehensive method for training teachers of improvisation in this, or similar, reflective – responsive models could possibly make a significant contribution to current

improvisational pedagogy. Beyond this specific area, future research in reflective-response teaching models may highlight additional areas of advancement possible in the general field of music education, advancements which could aid educators in that community to more creatively engage students in a unique 21st

century global environment of diversity and innovation.

Epilogue

"I've taught you a great deal and nothing. No one can teach you anything, not at the core, at the source of it. What you're doing – it's yours, not mine. I can only teach you to do it better. I can give you the means, but the aim – the aim's your own.“

Ayn RandThe Fountainhead

References

Azzara, C. (1999). An Aural Approach to Improvisation. Music Educators Journal 86. pp. 21- 25. Azzara, C. (2002). Improvisation, in R. Colwell and C. Richardson (Ed.), New Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning (pp. 171-187), Oxford University Press.

Allsup, R.E. (1997). Activating Self-Transformation through Improvisation in Instrumental Music Teaching. Philosophy of Music Education Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 80-85.

Bailey, D. (1992). Improvisation: It's Nature & Practice in Music. New York: Da Capo Press.

Beegle, A. (2010). A Classroom-Based Study of Small-Group Planned Improvisation With Fifth-Grade Children. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58(3), pp.219–239.

Berliner, P. (1994). Thinking in Jazz. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Borgo, D. (2004). Jazz in the Classroom: An Ecological Approach to Music Education. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 11, No. 3–4, pp. 174–90.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.

Day, W (2000). Knowing as Instancing: Jazz Improvisation and Moral Perfectionism, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 99-111.

Gordon, E. (1989). Audiation, Music Learning Theory, Music Aptitude, and Creativity. Suncoast Music Education Forum on Creativity, pp.75-81

Guilford, J. P. (1958). Can Creativity Be Developed? Art Education, Vol. 11, No. 6, pp. 3-7+14-18. Gustavsen, T. (1999). The Dialectical Eroticism of Improvisation. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Oslo, Norway.

Hall, E. (1992). Improvisation as an Acquired, Multilevel Process. Ethnomusicology, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 223-235.

Hickey, M and Webster, P. (2001) Creative Thinking in Music. Music Educators Journal, Vol. 88, No. 1, pp. 19-23.

Hickey, M. (2009). Can Improvisation Be Taught?: A Call for Free Improvisation in Our Schools. International Journal of Music Education, Volume 27 (4), pp. 285-299. Huovinen, E, Tenkanen, A., and Kuusinen, V. (2010). Dramaturgical and music-theoretical approaches to improvisation pedagogy. International Journal of Music Education, 29(1) 82–100.

Huizinga, J. (1949). Homo Ludens: A Study of the play-element in culture. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Koops, L. and Crump Taggart, C. (2011). Learning Through Play: Extending an Early Childhood Music Education Approach to Undergraduate and Graduate Music Education, Journal of Music Teacher Education, 20(2) 55–66.

Kratus, J. (1991). Growing With Improvisation. Music Educators Journal, Vol. 78, No. 4, pp. 35-40. Kratus.J (1995). A Developmental Approach to Teaching Jazz Improvisation. International Journal of Music Education, 26, pp.27-38.

Lewis, G. (2004). Improvised Music After 1950: Afrological and Eurological Perspectives. In Fischlin, D. and Heble, A. (Ed.), The Other Side of Nowhere: Jazz, Improvisation, and Communities in Dialogue (pp. 131-162). Middletown, CT, Wesleyan University Press.

Madura, P. (2008). Vocal Improvisation and Creative Thinking by Australian and American University Jazz Singers. Journal of Research in Music Education, Volume 56 Number 1, pp. 5-17.

Maehr, M., Pintrich, P. & Linnenbrink, E. (2002), Motivation & Achievement. The New Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning, Vol. I, chpt. 21, 348-372.

May, L. (2003). Factors and Abilities Influencing Achievement in Instrumental Jazz Improvisation. Journal of Music Education, Volume 51, Number 3, pp. 245-258.

McMillan, R. (1996). A Terrible Honesty: The Development of a Personal Voice in Musical Improvisation. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Melbourne, Australia.

McMillan, R. (1999).To say something that was me': developing a personal voice through improvisation. British Journal of Music Education, 16:3, pp. 263-273

McPherson, G. (1993). Evaluating Improvisational Ability of High School Instrumentalists. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, No. 119, pp. 11-20.

Moorhead, G. and Pond, D. (1978). Music of Young Children. Santa Barbara, CA : Pillsbury Foundation for Advancement of Music Education.

Nachmanovitch, S. (1990). Free Play. New York: Penguin Putnam Inc.

Nachmanovitch, S. (2005, February, 25). On Teaching Improvisation. Paper presented at the College Band Directors National Association, New York.

Nachmanovitch, S. (2006, December 1). Improvisation as a Tool for Investigating Reality. Paper presented at the International Society for Improvised Music, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Nicholson, S. (2005). Is Jazz Dead? Or Has It Just Moved Address? New York: Routledge.

Nisenson, E. (2000). Blue: The Murder of Jazz. New York: Da Capo Press.

Parsonage, C. (2007). Integrating Theory & Practice in Conservatoires: formulating holistic models for teaching and learning improvisation. British Journal of. Music Education, 24:3, pp. 295–312.

Peters, G. (2009). Philosophy of Improvisation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Potter, G. (1990). Analyzing Improvised Jazz. College Music Symposium, Vol. 30, No.1, pp. 64-74.

Pressing, J. (1987). Improvisation: Methods and Models. In J. Sloboda (Ed.), Generative Processes in Music (pp. 129-178). Oxford University Press.

Prouty, K. (2004). Canons in Harmony or Canons in conflict: a cultural perspective on the curriculum and pedagogy of jazz improvisation. Research and Issues in Music Education, Volume 2, number 1

Rancière, J. (1991). The Ignorant Schoolmaster. (Kristin Ross, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Rand, A. (1962). The Romantic Manifesto. New York: Signet.

Rand, A. (1943). The Fountainhead. New York: Signet.

Reason, D.. (2004). Navigable Structures and Transforming Mirrors: Improvisation and Interactivity. In Fischlin, D. and Heble, A. (Ed.), The Other Side of Nowhere: Jazz, Improvisation, and Communities in Dialogue (pp. 71-86). Middletown, CT, Wesleyan University Press.

Rilke, R.M. (1934). Letters to a Young Poet (M.D. Herter Norton, Trans.). New York: W.W. Norton.

Rose, R. (1985). Eight Elements of Jazz Improvisation. Music Educators Journal, Vol. 71, No. 9, pp.46-47.

Sarath, E. (1996). A New Look at Improvisation. Journal of Music Theory, Vol. 40, No.1, pp. 1-38.

Sarath, E. (2002) Improvisation & Curriculum Reform ,in R. Colwell and C. Richardson (Ed.), New Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning (pp. 188-198), Oxford University Press.

Sawyer, K. (2002). Improvisation and the Creative Process: Dewey, Collingwood, and the Aesthetics of Spontaneity. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 149-161.

Schippers, H. (2010) Facing the Music: Music Education from a Global Perspective. New York. Oxford University Press

Schroeder, D. (2002). Four Approaches to Jazz Improvisation Instruction. Philosophy of Music Education Review, Vol. 10, No.1, pp. 36-40.

Smith, C. (1998). A Sense of the Possible: Miles Davis and the Semiotics of Improvised Performance. In B. Nettl and M. Russell (Ed.), In the Course of Performance: Studies in the World of Musical Improvisation. (pp.261-290). Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.

Smith, D. (2009). Development and validation of a rating scale for wind jazz improvisation performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 57(3), pp.217–235.

Stubbs, J. (2002). Fellini's Portrait of the Artist as Creative Problem Solver. Cinema Journal, Vol. 41, No.4, pp. 116-131.

Sudnow, D. (2001). The Ways of the Hand: A Rewritten Account. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Tirro, F. (1974). Constructive Elements in Jazz Improvisation. Journal of the American Musicological Society, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp.285-305. Volz, M. (2005). Improvisation Begins with Exploration. Music Educators Journal, Vol. 92, No.1, pp. 50-53.

Watson, K. (2010). The Effects of Aural Versus Notated Instructional Materials on Achievement and Self-Efficacy in Jazz Improvisation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58, pp.240-259.

Werner, K. (1996). Effortless Mastery. New Albany, IN: Jamey Aebersold Jazz Inc.

Whyton, T. (2006). Birth of the school: discursive methodologies in jazz education. Music Education Research, volume 8, number 1, pp.65-81.