^ Yep, that's the thing though. It's kind of double-edged sword though because to really get out of the theoretical means to go completely atonal. And atonality is out there and is done quite well

That's the only way you break away from the rules; yet, atonality also has rules.

I think the problem is just like when talking about production (shout-out to Danny and Jeff), one gets to hung up on suggestions or guidelines mistaking them for rules.

Mind you, that there are some things that need to be factored in, but still take them as guidelines and not rules.

But I agree trying to force something never works in the long; however, you don't wanna be just throwing stuff around either. There's a difference between improvising and noodling for example. (And this is outside jazz. It doesn't have a monopoly on improvisation)

Noodling is a technique used when improvising, the thing is to not make the noodling obvious.

"I learned the rules just to break them later," Yet, there's the: "Rules are made to be broken," quip to only to realize that there are some that you haven't broken or that you've followed more than you've actually broken.

But yeah, noodle, but eventually use your noodle, too.

A person has to make faces also, when playing because it is like communication: - "You want me to do what in this song", "You're killing me with what you want me to play", all while playing the song, "That was a riff that was hard to do", etc.

Danny Danzi


....Janet: Learning progressions for me was a matter of jamming with other players. You get forced to play what they play and once you play something, you usually never forget it. You can then hear that progression played by someone else and you just know what it is. For example, there are a few different variations of 12 bar blues. However, once you hear/learn one of them, you just know the others and can usually figure them out by stumbling around for a few secs.

-Danny

So true. And how you use a chord progression can make it sound completely different. For example, the verse structure of 25 or 6 to 4 (Chicago) and One (Three Dog Night) use the same basic chord progression (in different keys) but they sound very different.

Janet

I have a book of old hymns that someone rearranged with cool chord substitutions.

That sounds fascinating.  Is it something currently in print?  I'd love to check it out.
 
A chorus I sang in did a concert of mostly British church music a year or two ago.  Several of the pieces were standard hymns in four part harmony.  But the final verse was sung in unison and a composer (who really knew what he was doing) supplied an alternate organ accompanyment with excitingly different harmonic progressions.  It was *way* cool.  Thus my interest in the book you've described.

Here is a quick and easy way to do what I was talking about (and actually it isn't atonal but I love that stuff as well... I am constantly messing with chromatics and dissonance). Step one. Pick a scale and key. Let's just say C Major for the sake of simplicity. We have seven notes. C D E F G A B. Then take two or more of the notes and play them in unison. You can double up on them or use any inversion you like. Then just keep doing that until you've come up with a pile of chords you think sound good together. Then arrange them into a song. Easy peasy. Works for all pentatonic and diatonic scales and for extra flavor you can use those modes/scale's variations or just straight up chromatics to add some movement (like walking bass notes, little melodies within the chord or changing the quality by flatting/sharping notes). It's a fun and easy way to write. Cheers.

Tim, I really do need to learn more songs and then learn the chords and write them down.

What??


While actually picking songs apart by listening and transcribing is a useful and valuable learning experience, you need some songbooks Janet. "Write them down" LOL.. Really?


I don't know if the books I pointed to above interest you but, Keep in mind that the "jazz" fakebook is not really "Jazz". It is popular songs from "the day". Many were and are used by the jazzheads, but, they are mostly just a big part of the foundation of american music. Just Songs. But again I digress. Not sure if you're into that kind of music (I was raised on it). So, what piano players do you like? Billy Joel, Elton, Keith Jarrett? I dunno.. Get their songbooks.


Ok, back to "JAZZ". In my mind there is no such thing as JAZZ anymore. The label has become so homogenized and twisted and bent that it really is sort of a mistaken label anymore (IMO). "Smooth Jazz",, yea right. give me break. I think they mean elevator music. Sorry, a little tangent there.


Anyway, so you want to learn how to PLAY the piano? Get a gig 5 nights a week and spend all day learning new songs for about 6 years. That should get you on the right track.

Hi Janet,

You've got a lot of great advice in this thread but, since you mentioned Pandora in an earlier response, I thought I'd throw my 2 cents in.

I think Pandora and sites like it can be a great source of inspiration/education because you can check out any style of music for free. No need to worry about whether or not you'll like it.

There's tons of great African, Latin, etc music a mouse click away. If you hear something you like, google the title and chances are the chord changes are on line somewhere.

Even if you don't learn any new chord progressions per se, you may be inspired by how musicians from other cultures are using the same I-IV-V progressions you are.

This is not elevator or muzak music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgw2sbsJNoM Play along, should be simple to do! Elevator music, oh my not! Now go off and do something.

TMIDI is right! You just can't go by listening only.

The reasons I'm going to give are theory based, but you'll see why seeing and hearing should be used in conjunction.

Note: This isn't a Sight-Reading vs. Play By Ear argument; however, there are downsides to both:

Here's the issue with Sight-Reading: You'll play and read fine with the page, but take it away and it just sucks (to be blunt) lol

Here's the downside to Playing By Ear: Enharmonics.

By ear alone, they don't matter, but the minute you start to write down the chords - or better yet: if you were to hear a piece in B (which has five sharps), but pick up the sheet music and it's in Cb (seven flats).

It's still not really an issue because one or the other is chosen for a number of reasons:

Pianists don't play in Cb, because they can play in B just as easily and five sharps don't bother them (seven flats may not bother them either, but there will be tons of accidentals in the music.)

The same is true with C# though seven sharps may not bother them as well. Take Chopin's Fantasie Impromptu - starts in 4 sharps, but ends in 7 sharps.

Now, when evoking enharmonics, we run into a problem ...

While five flats and seven sharps are okay, with Fb/db: we're dealing with eight flats (BEADGCF and B). Plus, there a double-flat when the scale is written

The other reason is instrument structure (not just the physical, but the acoustics). For example, the harp sounds better in flats keys than sharp keys since no pedals are engaged (all of them up) This is why is tuned to C-flat and the music is written in C-flat. The music may be written in B, but if it is, it'll be played in Cb cause it's easier on the instrument.

Db rather than C#, Gb rather than F#. OTOH. you just have to put up with D, G and A

Of course, this is up to the performer, but composer must at least consider it.

I realize I went off topic, a bit, but again, I do agree with TMIDI on getting the songbooks.

Yet, if these are your own tunes, it makes no difference what you call the chords (enharmonically speaking) - when written out - for you or someone else to play, however, it will matter.

spacealf


This is not elevator or muzak music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgw2sbsJNoM Play along, should be simple to do! Elevator music, oh my not! Now go off and do something.

Ah, that brings back memories. Memories of when I could play my instrument standing up. I listened to a of of these guys in the 80's but eventually gravitated more to guys like Larry Carlton, Al Di Meola and Allan Holdsworth. Call that jazz or whatever, it still sounds good to me.