Can classically-trained pianists improvise?

[rodoherty2]

Hi Guys,

I was browsing the net for some Jazz Piano forums and  stumbled across ABSRM's Jazz Piano forum.  I was stunned to learn that some grade 6'ers were asking if you "need to know many scales to learn jazz".  

https://forums.abrsm.org/index.php?act=ST&f=12&t=686&s=25af67078b81d0fe0407ef97c3c2707e

How can it be that someone is allowed past Grade 3 without being able to improvise even a little.  Surely this little hurdle would be enough to answer the question "Do you need to know scales in order to learn jazz?" with a resounding "YES" ...

I'm new to piano myself (I've played bass for a few years) and, to be honest, I'm beginning to get the impression that classically trained pianists are in a different dimension to jazz pianists ... and I don't mean that in the most complimentary way.

Granted, it takes years of very serious commitment to learn some of the suites that I see mentioned in every other post on this forum, but I wouldn't consider anyone to be a reasonably rounded musician if they cannot sit down and knock out a few chords with a few other musicans.

Have I got the wrong end of the stick?

Rob.

[Hmoll]

Have I got the wrong end of the stick?

Rob.

No, you've pretty much got it right. There are some classical pianists who are great improvisers - Loren Hollander, for example - but they are the exception that proves the rule. 95% of classical pianists never do any improvising because it is not taught.

Add to that the percentage of classical pianists who can play difficult music, but have no idea what they are playing. They're nothing more than typists.

[faulty_damper]

Add Beethoven to that list!

Beethoven, by all accounts, was the best improvisor.  Ever!  So good that he made women cry (and he scolded them for crying) and his competitor storm out of the room before he finished!  Improvisational contests: there used to be these types of contests.  Not anymore.  Now competitions are about playing a piece in a manner that was better than everyone else.

During the baroque period, there used to be a real improvisational part in concertoes.  There were no written notes to be played - the soloist would play his own during that time.  But as time passed, these improvisational parts started to be written.  Think about the solo in Bach's Brandenburg Concerto #?( the one with the long harpisichord solo.  Someone tell me which one that it.)

JS Bach had to improvise some thing for Sunday mass.


We can't improvise for donkey crap, or a million dollars - whichever is more desirable.

[comme_le_vent]

classical pianists rarely improvise - doesnt mean they cant.

but also, you dont have to be a great improviser to be a great musician.

interestingly though....i have heard that hamelin can improvise fugues!

and meanwhile....i can improvise 10 voice fugues.

[Lee]

I once went to a concert where the pianist asked for all those who knew how to write music, to go to the front desk during intermission, write 4 bars on a piece of manuscript.  He pulled 4 lots of music out of a hat, played them singly for the audience, then improvised a COMPLETE sonata!  So don't tell me classically trained pianists can't improvise!  

[anda]

some can, and some can't! that doesn't make them lesser pianists! i think everybody should do what they can do good, wheter it's playing written scores or improvising.

[Hmoll]

I once went to a concert where the pianist asked for all those who knew how to write music, to go to the front desk during intermission, write 4 bars on a piece of manuscript.  He pulled 4 lots of music out of a hat, played them singly for the audience, then improvised a COMPLETE sonata!  So don't tell me classically trained pianists can't improvise!  

Like I said, the exception that proves the rule.

[rodoherty2]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for the answers.  I guess I may have offended a little but I was very surprised at some of the replies to the "Do I need scales for Jazz?" thread on the ABRSM Jazz Piano forum.

For the record, I am a DISMAL improviser but I'm doing everything I can do address that.  I'm mainly concentrating on electric bass improv but I do want to extend that to piano in time.  I simply don't have the mechanics to be able to pull off anything beyond a straight scale right now.

Take Care,

Rob.

[thomas_williams]

Think about the solo in Bach's Brandenburg Concerto #?( the one with the long harpisichord solo.  Someone tell me which one that it.)

It is Bach's Brandenburg Concerto No. 5 in D Major-- I LOVE that piece!

[faulty_damper]

some can, and some can't! that doesn't make them lesser pianists! i think everybody should do what they can do good, wheter it's playing written scores or improvising.

Correction, very few can,

almost everybody else can't!  Who can't?   I raise my hand for this one, unless playing scales and chords count, then I can!  Good thing they teach how to play chords and scales, otherwise, I can't improvise for cow intestine.

So does anyone know how to improvise?  I mean, real improvisation?  If you do, let me in on your secret!

[cziffra]

the way i see it, generally classical musicians don't improvise because the focus for classical musicians is usally the PRODUCT.  by that, i mean that at all times the standard classical musician is preparing a piece that has already been produced, and the goal is always to render the product in it's full.

the focus of an improviser is not really the product, it's the PROCESS.  the process of thinking musically while playing, such that nothing has been produced until it's performed and it is the spotlighted process of musical creation.  

its a similar difference to a shakespearean actor and an improvising rap artist.  the first practices how to perform something else, and the second practices how to arrange their words in rhyme as they speak them.  

it all boils down to what you practice.  the only way to become a good improviser is to forget the idea that what you're actually playing is important (so often the focus of the classically minded) it isn't what you're playing, it's HOW you're playing.  what thoughts are going through your head, how do you make the musical decisions, which chords are good ones to move to, etc.  

so the way i see it is in a similar light to glenn gould: unless you compose, you are unlikely to understand music- you don't have the "composer's insight" to understand what's going on.  true improvisation is the most naked and real form of composition.  that's why classical musicians are somewhat in danger of musical stagnation- they often are not absolutely REQUIRED to do any musical thinking, wheras jazz musicians always are.

[Lee]

Improvise what?  In a classical style or jazz?  The two are worlds apart when it comes to approach.

I accept that many classically trained pianists find it difficult to convert to jazz.  I've seen ballerinas try and 'boogie' - the ones I've seen have the same dilemma as the classical pianist 'trying' jazz. It doesn't mean that there aren't ballerinas out there who can't 'shake their tail feather'  Some opera singers find it impossible to sing rock 'n' roll good ole throat style.
It's in the training - if you've spent your whole life perfecting one thing, you're going to be nearly perfect at that ONE thing.  It would be unreasonable to expect anyone to be good at something they don't do very often.

For those of you who say they can't improvise, how long do you spend at it compared with 'polishing' other composer's works?   If the answer is 'not very much time', then I guess it's not a surprise that 'you're not very good'.  Doesn't mean it has to stay that way.  

I've been improvising since I was very young.  I have a love for both the classical style and jazz.  I listen to both styles regularly, I attend both styles of performances, enjoy playing pieces in both styles, and enjoy improvising in both styles.  I spend a LOT of time improvising.  A LOT of time composing.  

Improvising starts with knowledge.  Blues scales, typical chord arrangements, familiarity with tension and release, suspense, the effects of silence (it IS golden!) Armed with this type of knowledge, it's then a matter of letting yourself loose, going with the flow, and not thinking.  FEELING is the key, not thinking. You must move with a rhythm.  Jazz improvisation is like dancing with your instrument.  

[Lee]

Correction, very few can,

almost everybody else can't!  

!

Don't correct someone when they haven't made a mistake.   "Some" is completely correct.  She did not state how many, nor did she suggest the categories were equal.

[faulty_damper]

Don't correct someone when they haven't made a mistake.   "Some" is completely correct.  She did not state how many, nor did she suggest the categories were equal.

It was a joke, Lee.  Say "ha ha" and you'll get it.

[cellodude]

Add Beethoven to that list!

Beethoven, by all accounts, was the best improvisor.  Ever!  So good that he made women cry (and he scolded them for crying) and his competitor storm out of the room before he finished!  Improvisational contests: there used to be these types of contests.  Not anymore.  Now competitions are about playing a piece in a manner that was better than everyone else.

During the baroque period, there used to be a real improvisational part in concertoes.  There were no written notes to be played - the soloist would play his own during that time.  But as time passed, these improvisational parts started to be written.  Think about the solo in Bach's Brandenburg Concerto #?( the one with the long harpisichord solo.  Someone tell me which one that it.)

JS Bach had to improvise some thing for Sunday mass.


We can't improvise for donkey crap, or a million dollars - whichever is more desirable.

Yup! They did that right up to Mozart's time. And in the concertos, the part where the performer gets to strut his stuff is called the cadenza. No notes are written down, he does whatever he likes to show how good he is. It is usually towards the end and when he's done showing off, the orchestra comes in and they finish the movement or piece. Now I'm not sure if performers prepare beforehand what they're going to play but I'm sure there must have been some who didn't.

If I'm not mistaken, it's good old Beethovan who first wrote down the cadenza explicitly for the performer to follow. So, it seems strange that he was such an improviser himself.

dennis lee

[Gambit]

Chick Corea and Keith Jarrett are the best impovasers in the world and both are classically trained painists. Period.

[ayahav]

I do not agree. Classical training also includes four-part harmony, which means classical pianists can improvise, however many choose not to.

[Bob]

Improvisation is definitely a very different skill than prepared playing.

You could improvise in nearly any style I imagine.

I've heard of improvisation being compared to language -- You develop it over time.  Baby steps...  (or maybe giant ones when you're ready)

[minimozart007]

faculty-damper,
3rd Brandenburg Concerto

[pianobabe56]

Actually, I have heard that classically trained pianists tend to make the best jazz pianists, which I agree with. Classically trained pianists are very well aquainted with complex harmonies. Also, take the time to sit down with some baroque music, and see how it compares to jazz- it's really interesting! A lot of baroque music does very well when you swing the eigth notes (something I do when I get too bored!  ) I think that people often don't realize the close ties between baroque and jazz.

[earthward]

I'm beginning to get the impression that classically trained pianists are in a different dimension to jazz pianists ... and I don't mean that in the most complimentary way.

Granted, it takes years of very serious commitment to learn some of the suites that I see mentioned in every other post on this forum, but I wouldn't consider anyone to be a reasonably rounded musician if they cannot sit down and knock out a few chords with a few other musicans.

I see what you mean I guess but if that's the case I'm certainly not well rounded.  Actually I have no interest for improvising-I tried taking a course and I found it extremely hard to motivate myself to do the work.  I think it's a totally different impulse that makes people want to improvise.  Jazz and classical people ARE in a different realm! They even look and behave differently.  You can completely tell a jazz person at first glance and probably vice versa. 

[quasimodo]

Well...
Actually a big part of the great Jazz Piano Stars were classically trained : Bill Evans, Keith Jarrett, and now Brad Mehldau, to mention a few.

I think the issue is rather related to some kind of snobism. Unfortunately, even today some classical teachers consider Jazz as "inferior" compared to the "sacred" classic repertoire and then don't bother initiating their students to Jazz (because they don't like it and they didn't bother knowing about it).

Beyond the music in itself, there is a huge difference of philosophy between classical performance and Jazz performance. In classical, there is a huge emphasis on the composer, over the interpretor. A lot of people consider that the performer is in the service of the piece (and its composer). Jazz is the contrary, it is not so important that Moon River was composed by Henry Mancini. Moon River will just be a "tool", a pretext for Brad Mehldau and his trio to let express a flow of musical ideas from their very self, according to their mood of the moment. They build a "piece" in itself, a piece which is played one and only one time in eternity.

Also, playing jazz requires the acceptance of dealing with the very deepest part of yourself. In classical, you have much more interaction with external elements : the score, what you know about the composer and his "manière" et al. So as we see there are huge differences of personal approach of the music, which probably seems dissuasive for some exclusively classical musicians.

The technique of improvisation in itself (if there is any) is only the emerged part of the Iceberg.

Ps : Moon River by Brad Mehldau's trio can be found on "Art of the trio Vol.2, Live at the Village Vanguard".

[jason2711]

Well, in a manner of speaking... all good classically-trained pianists improvise, as i was once told in a competition.  They just don't improvise in the way that jazz pianists do, but this interpration is generally what makes the pianist. 

But yeah, improvising on the spot, making up the notes, I find difficult, though I do have a little dabble at it now and again for a bit of a laugh.  However, like someone without any lessons in playing the piano is at reading music, its usually rather terrible

[pianowelsh]

At my school all students have a class in improvisation (by department). The first year we cover reading jazz chord notation and voicing and then in the second year we do a contemporary performance techniques project as part of our academic course which we then apply in the area of 'free improvisation'. In third and fourth years it is optional and open to anyone.  It is scary when you have to do your first free improvisation and just play for 5mins of origional material but it is actually very rewarding and it can be a really useful opportunity to try out new techniques and develop your technical palate. We didn't have any rules about tonality or even whether it had to be keyboard based - some students used the inside of the piano and the lid. it was just a time to be creative. I think the reason so few pianists enjoyed it at the time was because as classical pianists we are used to practising something to perfection before we let it out on show and we are I think to proud to just go out there and experiment and be able to go totally wrong and dry up etc. For me (and I'm not great improvisor) the barrier was broken when I said to myself I don't care what they think and just played. We had an insentive in that we were assessed on our improvisations (trust me it's wierd to improvise in an exam situation with your head of department and the head of jazz marking you!) especially as our HOD admits he can't improvise to save his life!
In direct answer to your question. Yes they can! but most are too bashfull to try and not all will improv like Art Tatum!

[quasimodo]

To be simple, you can't play Bach if you didn't learn Bach, You can't play Chopin if you didn't learn Chopin, you can't improvise if you didn't learn to improvise !!

Now, how to learn improvisation ? That's a huge debate : is it necessary to have all the background in music theory ? Is it by listening and trying to reproduce a whole lot of improvised music (jazz) ?

Could be a great discussion in this forum...

[jacobspauly]

I actually learned to improvise jazz on the guitar before I learned the classical piano many years ago. It's odd, but I find myself just now trying to relearn how to improvise on the piano because although I could read chord charts on the guitar, I can't on the piano. I've been working through some Jamie  Abersold patterns on the ii-V7-I changes. It is just hard to find the time to do improvising these days because my classical ambitions are so taxing and so much more fulfilling. I used to compose a whole lot more too, but I can't always find the time like I did in college I guess. I keep wanting to get back in the routine of this too.

I have noticed that my musical skills have diminished since improvising and composing slacked off. Sometimes I feel like an expressive typist like someone mentioned before because I'm not creating, just expressing what's already been created.

[presto agitato]

Just for the record:

 Keith Jarret is the best jazz pianist in the world, he is also the best piano improviser in the world and guess what, Hes classically trained.

[Ludwig Van Rachabji]

Question: Can classically-trained pianists improvise?

Answer: Why not?

[jbmajor]

It all depends on what that person sets out to learn, and how they go about learning it.  If all you do is read and play sheet music, you will never be able to improvise well, if at all.  However, if you play an equal amount just from your accumulated understanding of chord structures, scales, and musical theory, then you can have the best of both worlds.