Welcome to the Educational Resources page.
We will be posting various educational material here on an ongoing basis. Some “snippets” of things to practice, links to videos with interesting information, and some more substantial guest posts from our friends and colleagues in the musical community. Here are a couple of links to get things started. First of all, a video of a legend in saxophone education Joe Allard. Here he is talking about his approach to sound production and breathing (for both saxophone and clarinet). Mr. Allard taught many of the saxophonists considered to be masters of the last 40+ years. This includes David Liebman, who I had the good fortune to study with at the Banff Centre, and in New York, in the early 1980s. Here is “Lieb” carrying on the Allard message in his inimitable style. And, one more link. This one from Steve Neff’s excellent website. The interview with David Dempsey that Steve’s article links to is very interesting. After reading it I realized that a lot of the stuff I do must have been implanted in my brain as a result of my time with Allard students like Lieb, and Steve Grossman. Hope you enjoy the material that is posted here. Phil Dwyer.
My friend and colleague Rémi Bolduc might be the hardest-working musician that I know. His dedication and commitment to his craft are second to none and this is apparent when you hear him play. For the past few years Rémi has been posting instructional videos in a number of topic areas. He graciously allowed me to share on here. There are lots of videos on improvisation, and also a wealth of transcriptions that I will try and link to in the future. For now, something that we could probably all be more diligent with. Long tones. Take it away Maestro!
I must have listened to the Tenor Madness recording a thousand times; it’s the only time that Sonny and Trane recorded together. Here is an interesting short documentary that I came across recently that talks about both of them.
In the last couple of months I have been enjoying some great educational posts by a few saxophonists/teachers for whom I have a great deal of respect. I have done a lot of teaching over the years and, for the most part, very much enjoy it. However, as I have alluded to in previous posts, it is a challenge for me to quantify my improvising “process” because I tend to be a pretty intuitive player. So when people who are great players are able to break things down in ways that facilitate a new perspective I really appreciate it. A while back Jeff Antoniuk posted a video called “Scales Suck”. Notwithstanding the provocative tone of the post’s title, I thought that Jeff’s assessment had a lot of merit. In my improvising I’ve always been a lot more oriented towards focusing on chord tones, and that seemed to be the thrust of Jeff’s thesis. He has tempered that position somewhat more recently, but the way that he has built the series of videos has been really thoughtful and makes good musical sense, to me at least.
Anyway, Jeff has a YouTube channel with a wealth of great educational material for all instrumentalists interested in improvising. You can find it here. I would encourage anyone interested in improvising to spend some time checking out these videos. (I think the “Scales Suck” is #2, but I have watched several of the others and they are all fantastic. Thanks Jeff!!
In upcoming posts I’ll be talking about some other colleagues who are doing equally interesting work, but in the meantime enjoy what Jeff Antoniuk has to offer.
All the best! Phil Dwyer
Back when I was 16 I went up to the Banff Centre for the summer jazz workshop. That was the first time I ever met Don Thompson, as well as Kenny Wheeler and Dave Holland. Over the years I have the chance to play with Dave on a couple of occasions and with Kenny fairly often. Don and I on the other hand, almost from the time we met, formed a pretty special bond that has been central to my life for the last 35 years or so.
My formal study with Don was minimal, my informal study intensive and ongoing. Don epitomizes the idea of complete devotion to learning and practicing the craft of music. Much has been made of his ability to play piano, bass and vibes with equally remarkable skill, and this is certainly not something to be undersold. For me though it is more about his complete immersion in the musical process and how, despite being at the top of the game for a long time, he is constantly looking to improve and refine his skills. That is pretty inspiring. Don stayed at my house for a week once and practiced Young And Foolish every day for about 2 or 3 hours. Unreal.
We have played together in pretty much every format from duos up to orchestra. Lots of amazing gigs with Kenny Wheeler over the years. Once particularly, for me, amazing night in Toronto with John Handy, Dave Holland, Terry Clarke and Jim Hall. Not sure what I was doing there but I’ll take it!! Here is a track from a recording that I did with Don’s quartet. It won a Juno when it came out…around 2005 I think.
Don and I used to teach at a cool summer camp in Victoria…he also taught at my PDAMCA camp several times. Anyway, he used to hand out this “things you really have to know” sheet and I always thought it was pretty cool. Take a look and, as always, take the time to really consider what he is saying and play through the examples.
I had the pleasure of spending some time with Lee Konitz at the Banff Centre in 1982. I was too young (16) to really appreciate the depth of his offerings, but enjoyed it immensely nonetheless. The first time that the saxophone master class met we went around the room with each student playing for a little bit, and after I had played Lee looked at me and said “Phew, that’s great….someone that plays sharper than I do”! Anyway, over the years I have occasionally reflected on one idea that Lee presented to us: the 10-step improvisation method. Even at my young age I recognized that this was something of great value and I’ve tried to keep it in mind as much as possible. I was pleased to see if posted on saxophonist Mel Martin’s website recently. Here it is. If you have an interest in becoming a more coherent improviser I think this is a great approach. And here is a link to a video that I absolutely love, Lee playing Melancholy Baby, with Bill Evans.
“Our goals can only be reached through a vehicle of a plan, in which we must fervently believe, and upon which we must vigorously act. There is no other route to success.” -Pablo Picasso
If you want to improve musically, you need a plan. There’s no way around it. Some musicians have a plan in their head that’s more or less intuitive. Some follow a teacher’s plan, while others use books that lead them through a step-by-step curriculum (a great example of the latter is, in my opinion, Jerry Bergonzi’s Inside Improvisation series). Planning comes in all shapes and sizes, but the more intentional you are about it, the more likely you are to be successful (whatever that means to you).
There a lot of ways that you can plan your progress, but in this post we’re going to look at one area in particular, which is all about establishing effective goals using something called S.M.A.R.T. objectives. I know, this probably already sounds a little corny, like something that belongs in a corporate board room rather than a jazz education blog. However, if you stick with me, I think you’ll find that this idea has some really solid value with the potential to help you make a lot of consistent and intelligent progress as a musician.
The acronym S.M.A.R.T. reminds you to set objectives that are specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and time-bound (Banks and Presley). Let’s go through these ideas one-by-one.
Use clear language that communicates exactly what you want to accomplish. When you’re too vague, you end up with an objective that is both immediately attainable and completely unattainable at the same time.
Let’s say your objective is to “get better at playing Coltrane changes.” From the time that you complete your first practice session, you will have improved in this area, so in some ways, you already will have accomplished your objective! However, since it’s always possible to get better at playing Coltrane changes, in other ways, you’ll never accomplish it. This objective doesn’t give you clarity in the practice room; it just leads to more questions.
A better version would be to “master major 1-2-3-5 patterns through Coltrane Changes in all 12 keys at a metronome speed of 120 bpm.” That’s a mouthful, but it’s much easier to work with. You’ll know exactly what you’re trying to accomplish, and you’ll know exactly what it means to succeed or fail. This brings me to the next concept.
Part of the reason that the objective to simply “get better at playing Coltrane changes” doesn’t work as a S.M.A.R.T. objective is that there are no built-in criteria for determining success or failure. What does it actually mean to accomplish it? Every musician would give you a different answer. However, the improved version has clear parameters for success and failure, and is therefore much more helpful.
A good way to test the measurability of your objectives is to put them to what I call the “stranger test.” Imagine that you’re going to be responsible for assessing a complete stranger on his ability to perform the requirements of each objective that you set. The point here is that you have to do it without hearing him play prior to the evaluation day!
The idea is that your assessment of success or failure cannot require a comparison to some previous level of ability. The language of your objective should stand alone as a clear statement of achievement that leaves no room for interpretation.
Let’s put our sample objectives to the stranger test. How do they stand up? The first, to simply “get better at playing Coltrane changes,” turns out to be completely unmeasurable, partly because it only makes sense through the use of a comparison to some previous level of ability. However, the second requires no comparison, and is therefore clearly measurable. The stranger either will be able to perform the requirements of the objective or he won’t; it’s that simple.
Define your objectives in such a way that a real human being in the real world actually could achieve them. They should be realistically and thoroughly attainable without approximation and without any room for interpretation.
If your objective is to “play with perfect time,” then you need to adjust your wording, because it’s simply not possible for a human being to achieve. Aspiring to play with perfect time works as part of your musical blueprint, because at that stage, everything is hypothetical. However, when it comes to setting S.M.A.R.T. objectives, everything has to be practical.
Of course, it’s possible to develop such a strong sense of time that it feels perfect to you and anyone who plays with you. However, in that case, it’s far better to express your objective in wording that describes what that perfect-feeling sense of time actually means in practical terms. You could express this objective by saying that you aim to “stay in sync with a silent metronome for up to four bars at a time.” This is attainable, partly because it’s specific and measurable. Therefore, you can see how each of the steps in the S.M.A.R.T. objective formula helps you to stay on track with the others as well.
The next step is to make sure that your objectives aren’t only attainable in an objective sense, but realistic for you in a personal sense. Aspiring to stay in sync with a silent metronome for up to four bars at a time may be attainable, but it may not be realistic for you at this point in your development.
A more realistic goal for you might be to “stay in sync with a silent metronome for one bar at a time.” You always can increase the difficulty as you progress, but it’s important to make sure that each of your objectives is well-tailored to your personal strengths, weaknesses, and musical needs. There is no quicker way to mastery than taking your ego out of the equation and challenging yourself at a realistic level of intensity.
Of course, the degree to which a specific, measurable, attainable goal is also realistic for you is only a matter of your time frame. This brings me to the next and final step in the S.M.A.R.T. objective formula.
Like the carton of milk in your refrigerator, your goals must have an expiration date. If your objective is to “stay in sync with a silent metronome for up to four bars at a time,” then it might be totally unrealistic for you if your time frame is one or two weeks. However, if your time frame is twelve months, then it might be entirely realistic, and this is why having a time-bound goal is so vitally important. It helps you to determine what’s realistic for you and what’s not.
Resist the urge to make your time frames vague and general. Like your objectives themselves, your expiration dates should be specific so that you accurately can measure how close you are at all times to your proposed date of completion. This will help you to hold yourself accountable and stay on task.
Every time you step into the practice room and begin to work on something, ask yourself what goal you’re trying to reach, and then take the time to refine it using the S.M.A.R.T. objective formula. Even if this feels corny to you, it’s important to realize that you’re always goal-setting whether you’re intentional about it or not. You may do it intuitively, but I guarantee that you still do it. So why not make a point of doing it in a way that gives you the best chance of success?
All the best,
Banks, Renee, and Todd Presley. Work in Progress. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 2014. Print.
Pursuant to the last post, and the “do as I do, not as I say” one here is a final thought. I used material by Sonny Rollins, Bud Powell, and Freddie Hubbard in those two posts. I also used the Oxford comma in my lists, but that is beside the point. What I would like to mention is, if it’s not obvious, is that you have to work with the material that really gets your blood pumping. I always had pretty wide ranging tastes in saxophone players: I enjoyed listening to everyone from Stan Getz to Albert Ayler to the guy from Supertramp (John Helliwell). There is probably more Getz in my playing than Ayler or Helliwell but I learned something from all of them.
Depending on what kind of music you like you will gravitate towards certain players and maybe use some of ideas in my last two posts to build up your vocabulary in the style of music you are most interested in. Everyone is a product of the people who came before them, I was listening to Shotgun by Jr. Walker yesterday and was struck for the first time by the fact that David Sanborn must have, at some point, internalized that tune; or, he listened to whoever Jr. Walker listened to. Some of this ties in with Pat MacGibbon’s posts on transcribing, but I was always too lazy to transcribe more than a few bars of stuff here and there (but don’t tell Pat that). Anyway, off to my gig right now, but I’ll be back.
ps – I always wondered if Steve Jobs transcribed the “one more thing” lick from Peter Falk?
A while back I posted on a particular Sonny Rollins phrase and how it related to my approach for developing technique, style, and vocabulary. A few further thoughts on that topic. If you want to be an improvisor you have to practice improvising. So, if you were to take a look at the Sonny thing discussed previously and wonder what you could do next here are a few ideas that involve taking one simple idea and, by exercising your creativity muscle, transform it in different ways so you get maximum value. For example you could do this: ; this ; or this.
Those are just examples off the top of my head, obviously there are a lot more possible variations. Along these same lines, here are a couple of other fragments that I use as warmups but which are also – in various forms – part of my vocabulary. The first one is a bit of a Freddie Hubbard tune called Happy Times. Here it is as it appears in the tune. And this is a variation that I use as an “all keys” warmup. Once again, as with the Sonny phrase, use your own imagination to see what kind of variations you can come up with and how you could apply them.
Finally, the opening phrase of a great Bud Powell tune called Wail. If you took a half-dozen phrases from Bud Powell tunes – Dance of the Infidels, Bouncin with Bud, Parisian Thoroughfare for example – and put them through the ‘theme and variations’ process you would be well on your way to developing a great bebop vocabulary.
Back when I was about 16 I used to go to Vancouver and hang out with some of the players who were making there mark on the professional scene there. Perry White, Patric Caird, Tom Keenlyside (who was more established) and Campbell Ryga were all very encouraging and they turned me on to a lot of music that I might never have found on my own. I remember hearing John Coltrane play But Not For Me at Pat Caird’s place and having my mind completely blown. Cam was listening to a wide variety of stuff, I heard Eddie Harris, David Sanborn, and Bunky Green for the first time through Campbell. Another recording that Cam played me was the first Michael Brecker/Claus Ogerman collaboration. One track in particular really stands out in my memory, so I was happy to see what appears to be a very accurate transcription show up on the intrawebs. Check it out here.