It is likely that before the establishment of reliable notation systems around 13th century, musicians, particularly in the performance of secular music , made copious and imaginative use of improvisation.  800 years later this important creative skill is being largely ignored by music educators.  Louise has asked me about my favourite quotes.  Here is one by Miles Davis: " Don't play what's there, pay what's not there."

Is it not true that having been taught to play precisely what is dictated by the symbols we sometimes fail to acknowledge musically both style and musical import.?

 

David, an intriguing question. To which musical periods do you refer? How do you recommend starting to explore improvisation, or encouraging pupils?

Improvisation is so important - I've seen some remarkable 'improvised' performances, such as Wayne Marshall improvising Fugues for a BBC Radio comedy show recording many years ago. It always becomes clear straight away that a musician really knows their stuff if they can improvise - there's no doubt in my mind that it strengthens what musicians can do.

But I guess the really brilliant thing about improvising *with others* is that you have to be so alert... it forces people to LISTEN!

Now that is something! Improvising a fugue. When I was a student in London I listened to Charles Spinks improvise a double fugue on the organ. I was not well enough informed or experienced enough at that time to know how successful he was in meeting the structural demands of the style but he did make a glorious noise.

You do need to know your stuff in order to be improvise intelligently. I think 'theory' ( which has little to do with music) should be abolished in favour of improvisation. Music grammars can then be learnt in a creative situation. I agree -LISTEN' has to be a key word - listen, as the French say "avec tous les oreilles"

David! What a beautiful vision! I have no doubt that if people learnt to improvise intelligently it would transform the level of true listening and true music making that takes place. And more importantly, it would ingrain all that music theory far more deeply into the subconscious than any music theory class would ever do!

But is that enough? Do we not also need to learn music theory consciously, in order to understand what it is that we have embedded in our minds? I think a happy medium of both might be the ideal; theory and improvisation, taught together, in a practical - not a classroom - setting?

Best, Simon

You are right of course, Simon. Essential rudimental knowledge and conceptual understanding requires a systematic instructional programme to complement the development of creative skills. Such a programme needs to introduce essential fundamental understandings using methods and terminology that is understandable at all those levels of cognitive development that are commonly found among young musicians, and taking into account the confusion that can arise, for instance in aural perception of rhythm patterns, when a subjective perception of a stimulus does not accord with the notated version - the 'answer'. As a small boy I always had difficulty with 'words of learned length and thunderous sound'! 'Compound triple' for instance sounded more like an exotic serving of ice cream than an understandable descriptor of a particular style of rhythm pattern notation.

Best regards, David

Improvisation is an incredibly exposing and exciting way of making music. Before I start a long ramble on about my thoughts on it, I'll just lean on a quote that (I believe) John Cage said, that "all improvisation was just using the performers memory bank"..... Almost like it were just tricks and patterns, regurgitated over and over again. I personally don't believe this, and yet, I know an awful lot of so called improvisations are just this, regurgitated material ..... I think as a performer of this, one must run far away from this extreme.....

I think it's dangerous when improvising (something I do a lot of) not to fall into these traps. (if you want to find out more about the projects i do, everything from improvising with actors and dancers, to structured classical improvisation performing fugues and sonatas with an ensemble (prima volta) etc..... check out my website.... www.drewbalch.com

I have had the utter pleasure of being taught improvisation by a great man, called David Dolan (pianist) Check him out, he's really worth a look. (I have also worked with Matthew Barley before on various improvsiation projects......)

I guess the danger of improvisation is that you are literally composing on the spot and as a performer it is so difficult to keep the moment alive and not to just dripple on and on without saying anything. The minute an improvisation feels too long is the moment it is dead, (a little trick I learnt from David Dolan)

Random thoughts for now from me I'm afraid, it is still very early morning..... (at least in my mind)..... more to follow I'm sure :)

Drew, that's very interesting. How do you know when you have said enough? MB

I believe there are (at least) TWO types here. First, Improvisation must be supported, as indeed composition must, by a thorough knowledge of musical theory, structure and counterpoint. Only then can a true musician in 'Classical' style be successful in improvisation. I am an organist, and have never forgotten the wonderful music making in live recital of such figures as Marcel Dupre, Jean Guillou and latterly Wayne Marshall and Olivier Latry as superb musicians and improvisers. Now, they all have true theoretical grounding.

However, the second (or first - I do not wish to make order here!) is of course the improvisers from the jazz world. They would not necessarily be trained in a Classical manner, but have just as much to offer within their genre. I heard a radio programme just today about Ronnie Scott's, and with much imaginative and probing improvisation included in the music we heard.

What I find most difficult is poor improvisation which church congregations sometimes have to endure from organists where a written piece would 'cover' the silence so much better - anyway, why can't we have more silence in church services? I sometimes play the organ for a service, and IF I feel (rarely) that my improvisation will improve or excite the proceedings, I will play - but usually I remain silent, and I'm sure the congregation thank God for this!!