I'm involved in a new project that is doing some free jazz pieces and I'm relatively unfamiliar with the style. I'm familiar with Ornette's Free Jazz, and I've really been listening to The Shape of Jazz to Come a lot lately. Does anyone have some recommendations of free jazz recordings to check out to get a good idea of what to do on bass?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Double Bass Recommendations of Free Jazz
- Thread starter StuFordBass
- Start date
Charles Tyler, Albert Ayler, Art Ensemble of Chicago, Muhal Richard Abrams, Sam Rivers should give you a good start.
Of course you can listen to others for inspiration - but the point is that you shouldn't do what somebody else did - it should be completely improvised with no prior collusion or preconception.
If you are playing in the style of somebody else - then it's not "Free Jazz".
As soon as you play something recognisable , then you aren't playing "Free"... ?
Of course you can listen to others for inspiration - but the point is that you shouldn't do what somebody else did - it should be completely improvised with no prior collusion or preconception.
If you are playing in the style of somebody else - then it's not "Free Jazz".
As soon as you play something recognisable , then you aren't playing "Free"... ?
This is good advice- that said I would recommend checking out William Parker.
Joe
Of course you can listen to others for inspiration - but the point is that you shouldn't do what somebody else did - it should be completely improvised with no prior collusion or preconception.
If you are playing in the style of somebody else - then it's not "Free Jazz".
As soon as you play something recognisable , then you aren't playing "Free"... ?
Come on Bruce. You're arguing semantics. I guess it is TalkBass.
Stu. There is so much stuff out there that falls into the 'free' category. Anything from extended technique stuff to freebop. What more specifically are you looking for?
Of course you can listen to others for inspiration - but the point is that you shouldn't do what somebody else did - it should be completely improvised with no prior collusion or preconception.
If you are playing in the style of somebody else - then it's not "Free Jazz".
As soon as you play something recognisable , then you aren't playing "Free"... ?
If you DON'T listen to the history of the music you are nearly sure to just turn in a less interesting version of what someone else already did. When you freely improvise you are free to use pre-determined material, react against know historical precedents, update ideas put forth in earlier times, etc.
The idea of free goes beyond the moment and is now understood in a wider sense.
Blindly reinventing the wheel is NEVER an interesting way to go.
You are certainly free to do what you want, but if you put forth a boring, un-informed performance, nobody is going to care.
Albert Ayler, Spiritual Unity.
Gary Peacock is the bassist. This is the quintessential free jazz album, IMO.
Gary Peacock is the bassist. This is the quintessential free jazz album, IMO.
But if you listen to a recording of Free Jazz in order to find out : "what to do on bass" - then surely that's far more likely to mean you will end up playing a less interesting version of what someone else already did..?
I think it's an interesting paradox.
But if you listen to a recording of Free Jazz in order to find out : "what to do on bass" - then surely that's far more likely to mean you will end up playing a less interesting version of what someone else already did..?
I think it's an interesting paradox.
A creative person will end up using the information to start where the others left off, thus pushing things forward. A person who would find themselves in the situation you outline above has no chance of making interesting music regardless of genre.
Getting a "Good idea of what to do on bass" is going to require knowing where to start, which requires listening to the recorded history.
Believe me, I have been doing it for a minute - free jazz musicians who can play an original idea without listening to the history of the music are far more rare than the fabled bass guitarist with "big hands" who can just use bass guitar technique on double bass! Those who try are, unfortunately, about as common.
Believe me, I have been doing it for a minute - free jazz musicians who can play an original idea without listening to the history of the music are far more rare than the fabled bass guitarist with "big hands" who can just use bass guitar technique on double bass! Those who try are, unfortunately, about as common.
I was just saying though, that if you if you copy what somebody else did - that's not Free Jazz, however well played!
I think there is an interesting paradox - as if you listen to a lot of Free Jazz, there is a temptation to throw in things you have heard, licks that people have played, "Jazzy" lines, etc etc.
Whereas, I have heard classical musicians with no experience of Jazz, who are asked to improvise - admittedly musicians at a very high level - who have played very interesting things.
For me the paradox is - as it becomes "free-er", does the music become less about Jazz and more about pure improvisation that has no roots in Jazz? For example, in Britain we have had many fusions between Indian music and local Jazz musicians - where there is little Jazz or Bues references...?
I think there is an interesting paradox - as if you listen to a lot of Free Jazz, there is a temptation to throw in things you have heard, licks that people have played, "Jazzy" lines, etc etc.
Whereas, I have heard classical musicians with no experience of Jazz, who are asked to improvise - admittedly musicians at a very high level - who have played very interesting things.
For me the paradox is - as it becomes "free-er", does the music become less about Jazz and more about pure improvisation that has no roots in Jazz? For example, in Britain we have had many fusions between Indian music and local Jazz musicians - where there is little Jazz or Bues references...?
Still wrong. Free jazz is a style - the jazz part makes it so. Totally free improvisation has room to move into a lot of different areas. Many regions and generations have codified versions of what free improvised music means to them but there are no obligations to play that way.
Free jazz generally refers to vigorous music with a lot of momentum, so what William Parker and Peter Kowald played is going to be helpful to learn to do just to push the music forward.
The goal is to keep the music free of song forms and pre-set chord changes, not free of material that had ever been played before.
When you put "free" in front of a word for an established genre like bop, rock, funk, you still use the hallmarks of those genres.
Free jazz generally refers to vigorous music with a lot of momentum, so what William Parker and Peter Kowald played is going to be helpful to learn to do just to push the music forward.
The goal is to keep the music free of song forms and pre-set chord changes, not free of material that had ever been played before.
When you put "free" in front of a word for an established genre like bop, rock, funk, you still use the hallmarks of those genres.
Who decides that? What makes you the arbiter of what people in Europe, for example, can and can't play?
I have heard a lot of Free Jazz that is quiet and contemplative.
Who says that I am wrong and you are right? Surely if it is freely improvised - then anybody can do what they like and you can't stop them!!
Bruce,
You are right in that free music can never be fully defined. However, you are wrong to assume that all preconceived ideas and criteria must be discarded.
I would suggest reading "Perpetual Frontier: The Properties of Free Music" by Joe Morris if your genuinely curious about this topic.
You are right in that free music can never be fully defined. However, you are wrong to assume that all preconceived ideas and criteria must be discarded.
I would suggest reading "Perpetual Frontier: The Properties of Free Music" by Joe Morris if your genuinely curious about this topic.
- Jan 12, 2004
- 1,493
- 1,270
- Disclosures
- Owner, Stand Up Guy Basses (Repair/Sell/Buy upright basses)
Re-railing the topic:
"Out to Lunch" by Eric Dolphy.
His last and most adventurous recording, IMHO. Still kind of a transition into free playing, with some really strong melodies as frameworks. Richard Davis isn't much bound by tradition on this one. Also, the ending of "Something Sweet, Something Tender" still makes me cry...
Paul (Eh_Train)
"Out to Lunch" by Eric Dolphy.
His last and most adventurous recording, IMHO. Still kind of a transition into free playing, with some really strong melodies as frameworks. Richard Davis isn't much bound by tradition on this one. Also, the ending of "Something Sweet, Something Tender" still makes me cry...
Paul (Eh_Train)
I have studied it for 15 years, listenened to countless CDs and been to classes with many people who have been heavily involved in European Free Jazz!
And I have....? Freely improvised music and free jazz are two different things. Since I have played in bands and projects with so many American and European innovators of both free jazz and free improv I am going to say I have a better grasp on the situation than you do.
