David Baker: How To Play Bebop - Critical Review.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 вер 2024
- If you have this series of books and found you still don't sound like your bop heroes, don't worry there is nothing wrong with you. In this Video I show you some of the things wrong (and right) in regard to David Bakers bebop series. If you have these books and are happy, pay no attention to what I say.
I think the critique here is a bit misguided, as it is valid only if one is looking at this book as a self contained recipe for learning to play bop. Clearly it won’t - and neither will any other book - deliver around that expectation. And without question, the single most important part of learning bop will be hundreds and hundreds of hours of active focused listening to great players. But the baker books do serve a useful purpose as references. I especially find this true of volume II. Sifting through the various lines he has written will yield much material for practice. So for example, if I am looking to work on a II V line beginning on the 3rd of the m7 I can very quickly browse through what he has, and find something that I like and can I can develop into an exercise, e.g. running the line (by ear!) through all 12 Keys, or varying the line melodically or rhythmically and the transposing that. And of course I can do the same when I listen to bird and hear a great line. But these two approaches are not mutually exclusive! Why would we even expect that they would be? This book is very useful reference and source of material, and in that regard it’s one of the best I’ve seen. But, “no”, one shouldn’t expect it to turn you into a fluent Beboper any more than a French dictionary will make you fluid in French, or Slomninsky will turn you into a modern composer. These book are just a tool and serve as source material that one may dip into from time to time. And as such this is a good one. Now in fairness to the reviewer the title does say”how to,play Bebop”, but at the onset this should be seen as marketing. I think the reviewers literal take on the title, and perhaps some felt frustration with what it won’t deliver to him, is what has energized a critique that misses the point of how such a book should be used. And make no mistake there is plenty of Bebop language in here to keep one busy for a very long time.
Joe Cannavo
Book got recommended to me by a teacher, watched this video before getting into it.
Now I'm only a little way into the book but playing through the examples and trying to understand what he says in the book really helps me get a better appreciation of bebop language. I find myself hearing alot more and recognising fragments of phrases in music I then go listen to everywhere from Grant Green to Esperanza Spalding.
For me, someone just trying to get into bebop playing a little more now, alot of Baker's comments and examples are quite ear opening.
Thanks for the heads up. I tool
Lessons years ago for Jazz at Belhaven college and the teacher who knew everything about jazz on guitar surprised me how he didn’t swing when I went to hear him at a restaurant.
I could not agree more!!! Out of all the bebop cats on UA-cam you are the only one I’ve seen that hits the nail on the head!!!
An excellent critique of jazz pedagogy in general. Avoid " How To" books, a marketing gimmick.
One reason C. Parker's solos swing is that he uses 3-beat figures (hence across the bar-line) extensively.
Yet you will rarely see these discussed in the context of solos. Knowing what a 3-beat figure is doesn't mean you can use them effectively. Yet the pedagogues for the most part think that defining a 3-beat figure is adequate !
Try finding all the 3-beat figures in a C. Parker solo and understand them as to where they start and end (Charleston resolutions again rarely discussed)..
Quite challenging. One of the many keys to why great soloists swing.
I agree with you! I think Most essential jazz study is listening.
It's unfortunate that you're getting so much negative feedback when the issues you've raised are perfectly well-reasoned. While these method books and academic models have their place as learning supplements, they are just that. I am also doubtful that Bird thought much about scales when he played. My take is that he was thinking entirely about chords tones and harmonic function, as you explained in your video. You also make a great point about rhythm being essential to the bebop idiom. Kudos!
Talking about the early “real” beboppers, Miles Davis told John Scofield that he thought that perhaps it was Charlie Christian who started the whole bebop movement, he thought that maybe Charlie Parker and Monk might have heard Charlie Christian early on then went on starting the movement. Certainly Christian was a powerhouse rhythmically.
Also, I found interview from as early as 1954, with the great Mary Lou Williams for Melodie Maker magazine where she also speaks of a strong Charlie Christian early connection with the bebop movement:
“When Monk first played at Minton's there were few musicians who could run changes with him. CHARLIE CHRISTIAN, Kenny Clarke, Idrees Sulieman and a couple more were the only ones who could play along with Monk then. Charlie and I used to go to the basement of the hotel where I lived and play and write all night long. I still have the music of a song he started but never completed. (....) Thelonious Monk, CHARLIE CHRISTIAN, Kenny Clarke, Art Blakey and Idrees Sulieman were the first to play bop. Next were Parker, Gillespie, and Clyde Hart, now dead, who was sensational on piano. After them came J.J. Johnson, Bud Powell, Al Haig, Milt Jackson, Tadd Dameron, Leo Parker, Babs Gonzales, Max Roach, Kenny Dorham and Oscar Pettiford. Those men played the authentic bop, and anybody who heard the small combo that Dizzy kept together for so long in New York should easily be able to distinguish the music from the imitation article.”
There's a good chance she knew what she was talking about, because in the 40s or 50s she went to live very close to Minton's Playhouse and I think gave lessons to Monk and Powell, she got close to those beboppers.
Also, to add some fine beboppers to the list, I think Sonny Stitt and Dexter Gordon would make into it (as of course people who adopted the idiom much later). Al Haig too, earlier, brilliant bebop pianist, but who probably copied Powell.
I'm not disputing this anecdote but in terms of pure notes many guys could play like Christian they just weren't guitarists. I'm not even sure Christian as great as he was has the best chorus on Rose Room. Moreover, I don't know if you could argue his version is really better than Django's.
This is a great video. The institutionalization of Jazz and particularly the attempted codification of Bebop is severely misguided and often misses the point(the actual music). I've tried all the Baker and Abersold books and was left feeling frustrated and disconnected from the music I was trying to emulate. I stopped and bought every Bebop recording I could find and listened and like a child learning to speak, began building a vocabulary. I still have a long way to go but that approach has really been the only thing that helped.
I know what you mean about these methods. I used to practice all day every day, and I remember sitting on a train home with this (or other books) thinking "this one will do it!" But after some years I noticed that learning solos on the alto and learning to comp on piano were the things that helped the most. You can usually get some good bits of info from most of the books though.
I couldn’t find a video of you playing in your channel
Hi there, I agree 100 % with your review. The good way to master bebop (and jazz ?) is to study in details Charlie Parker's themes (very important), solos (after knowing bunch of themes), blocks and typical lines, and to study very closely the rhythm (where notes & lines are on bars and how they connect chords and move the music foward)
[The solo around 15:00 is really terrible : it sounds like military-jazz music :-D ] .
Thanks for your videos.
I’ve became familiar with this book years ago and came to the same conclusions. Well done.
Mr. Andy Shure , I would like to let you know that the David Baker Method Books on how to play bebop were very helpful To me and is a method that I would recommend .Concept and approach starting with the bebop dominant. scale and common endings to start gets you in right away with effectively playing chord tones on the down beats .Also the playing of lines from chord tones and then non chord tones with many devices to keep the chord tones on the strong beat.there is a good useful info
for players on any level to get understanding . I would like to try your method book that you have written . Also could you play something for me to get an idea of what your level of understanding is of Bebop . I think your review tells me more about you then about Mr. David Baker ..... Keep it positive and contribute to make it better is my recommendation .Players Play and everyone else wishes and copies . Quality is not an accident it is the result of intelligent consistent effort .
If you agree with Baker and are happy with these books then please ignor this video! I state, and have always stated that People should not take what I say as Gospel - as some take the words of Baker and others. I've studied 1940s Bebop and particulary Charlie Parker for many years and still feel I have a lot to learn. Bakers Bebop series of books were very helpful to me also, because they showed me how not to play bebop - and I found that knowledge very useful. You cannot learn to play this great music from a book. Books can offer insight, but if you are not engrossed into the great players of that era Parker, Powell, Brown, Gillespie, Navarro, Monk etc you will never get it. Dennis Diblasio says he doesn't know how people learned to play Bebop before this series of books. They listened and studied solo's - as anyone should brcause it's the best way! PS. I think Bakers solo in book 1 shows he can't 'play it'.
Agree with you
For me, Bird was thinking about phrases (musical sentences, not just words, verbs, nouns, pronouns, adverbs) when soloing. He was thinking about making sentences that sounded good and made sense. He wasn't thinking about scales, arpeggios, etc.... At that speed, you don't have time to think. You have to already know what you're going to say before you start speaking (thinking). You have to understand a language before going out and making a speech in that language, without a teleprompter. You just have to become fluent in the language and not think of grammar everytime you need to make one sentence. That is why jazz players practice a lot so that the jazz language just becomes second nature. That is why they can navigate fluently across different chord changes and still have their own sound.
David Baker's series was helpful to me. I have used the books with guitar and trombone. I don't disagree with your criticism, however I think the solo you mention was intended as more of an instructive etude. His approach of demonstrating common practices in using the scale taught me much as a beginner. Books two and three provided tons of common ii V licks taken from recorded solos. It is not going to make you play like Parker but it is a start.
I thought that was the whole idea of instruction books - to get you to understand and play like the masters. Playing through a load of ii V licks without understanding the music as a holistic whole is a waste of time in my opinion. That solo by Baker bears no resemblance to the music I know as Bebop Jazz and there are many technical errors. However, from my point of view, I am grateful to Baker for his insight into bebop scales and their relationship to chords.
Some teachers believe that music theory can come later, and that the fast path to improvisation is learning two to eight bar phrases taken from, say, the Parker Omnibook. The student then has a kernel that they can expand on. Others believe you won’t get far unless you have a grounding in music theory, and can understand how working musicians put it all together by analyzing their solos. I don’t think the first approach is totally without value but that no one gets very far without putting in the time in learning the theory behind it.
Thanks, great info, I've just got some of Baker's IIV patterns books and immediately got a wierd feeling that the patterns sounded corny. I'll definitely bare these things in mind when ploughing through!
Two more quotes in the solo: 14:50 is a bit from Tenor Madness and 15:13 is from Tricotism.
I actually love the way Joe Pass swings on guitar. Great lines. Frank Vignola also.
7:06 "basically you're playing that E on B"... no you don't..... david baker shows a dominant scale and 2 more chords, where you can use that scale also (Gm, C7 and Em7b5). david baker doesn't say that you have to start on C and play "up and down" (like you say) and land with an E on a downbeat. that is just scale material you can use. the idea is to start on a chord note like G or Bb or D and then play that "up and down". then the E would be passing note. no offense, but are you deliberately trying to misunderstand that? I think it's quite obvious how to apply that scale and you seem to be an experienced player and bebop connoisseur. when I'm wrong, please explain me, thanks!
That is right and logical. This review is...terrible.
That solo starting always on beat 1 does sound corny hahaha
Baker was a great teacher but not a first rate composer/player, it's a short book and clearly not comprehensive in any way. It merely shows a way to enter the language: bebop 101
Regarding alemanito84 comment below - The bebop scale for the G minor chord is the C Dominant bebop scale according to Baker. Taking this scale from G would be GABbBCDEFG. Starting from G (1st chord note) and running eighth notes upwards would put E on beat. Starting on Bb (second chord note) and running eighth notes upwards would put E on beat. Starting on D (third chord note) and running upwards in eighth notes would not put E on beat. Two out of three of the chord notes he states put the E on beat. In my opinion that scale does not work - which is what I said in the video.
7:17 II and V are the same chord bro they both have the 4 of the key that's the only note that matters when you're playing changes
That solo sounds like it was generated by an AI.
Exactly. They are in the style of Parker but still far off the mark.
A book on how to play jazz or especially “bebop” is pure nonsense.... why? Because that cats that made the music did not use books, they lifted and then played in the clubs ... experiential learning. This book is in indeed a contradiction - it turns jazz/ bebop into a formula and that’s the furthest from what it is ...it’s based a lot in the rhythm for starters, I would even promulgate that the rhythm is even more essential than the notes being played
Well....I don't have to even hear the solo at 15:00 to know it will sound....square. 1&2&3& rhythm patterns are square and I mean mathematically speaking. That's not what I am after. For my money Hal Galper comes as close to conveying the process of playing interesting jazz solos in his book Forward Motion. Interesting solos don't start on the one they resolve to the 1 and I mean rhythmicly not harmonically. There's nothing interesting about counting to four regardless of how many times you multiply or divide it. And then, not say it's all inclusive, there is the matter of playing on top of, ahead or behind the beat. You just have to listen to a ton of good jazz to play it. Granted you have to know the structure and the rules but there's a whole lot more to playing jazz than what meets the eye.
I would say that bebop is composed by rythym, pivoting, octave displacement, use diminished triards, cromatic passing, this at least what i've gathered in a year
In all my years studying Bop. I would kind of agree with you. Rhythm is very important. However, after Rhythm I would say you have to understant the patterns as next in importance.
how do you get by the way an edgy sound out of the sax?
you are so right i think they play alot of arpeggios to. And as for Charlie Parker sorry fans but he is not my favorite for bebop. Maybe because i'm more of a swing fan. Charlie sounds redundant and a lot of time over plays in my opinion. He does have a lot of songs that i like but when he starts improve it sounds redundant. OK WAIT FOR IT.
It depends on the recording. For example, his 1942 recording of Cherokee is not repetitive at all and it sounds much better than lots of his solos.
Where might I find your recordings? I looked in UA-cam and Spotify and found none. I would really like to hear your music since you seem to be a bebop authority, I want to hear your artistic output and judge for myself. Thanks!
From what I've learned about Barry Harris I think he'd agree with most of this. More people are coming round to it since his death.
For those that do not know of David N Baker I suggest you cop an earfull . He was no ordinary musician .
That doesn't mean that I am wrong in my critical review or that I'm dismissing Baker's other work. I have many other books by Baker and I haven't criticised them. People should listen to Davd N Baker then listen to Charlie Parker and the other great bop musicians and then decide what is authentic bebop. I'm only giving my opinion.
@@bebopreview3187 I never said that you were wrong or right . I suggested that anyone who had not heard him should hear him .
As a graduate of the David Baker era IU jazz program, I must admit that I learned a great deal from Professor Baker. I must also admit that his method caused me years of frustration trying to attach a new scale to every chord. (...somewhat due to a misunderstanding on my part.) The video critique of note choices picks everything apart even further and makes improvising an even more in-depth music theory study - compounding that frustration. It's music!!!
You need to find out where Baker got the concept from. That'd be half your battle over with.
Dr. Baker’s series of books on bebop are actually very good and useful to studies if you understand functional harmony in the context of jazz improvisation. The irony here is that Dr. Baker’s references are actually based upon what the Jazz masters themselves played and he codified their tendencies in the books. He’s explaining concepts and practices. I am surprised that there’s no complaint about the sample materials not being transposed into every key. I think you mean well but you’re off point. And to use your corny computer playbacks to buttress your arguments is laughable.
I agree with you, and many thanks
👎🏾 If you’ve actually transcribed any Charlie Parker solo, you would see that David Baker did a good job codifying the bebop language. There’s a reason why if you look up jazz tutorials, as you said, everyone it’s talking about bebop scales. That’s because it’s worth learning and DB’s book is an invaluable resource.
Like I state above; if you are happy with these books ignore what I said. I'm not and neither are a lot of other people. Baker did not do a good job but he did contrubute to our knowledge of Bop by stating that bebop scales are related to chords. Thomas Owen did a better job - Jen Kwang Chang did a better job - these are the real bebop enthusiasts - not David Baker who is more in line with George Russell's ideas on Jazz. Bebop scales are his best idea from the books but even they are not really correct. Bebop scales do not really exist. What exists are added notes on chords that appear to make scales when played in linear form. There is a bit more to bebop scales that I speculate on in my video series 'Charlie Parker The Levin Wilson controversy.
Bebop review Baker did a bad job?!? Bebop scales do not really exist?!? So instead of trusting David Baker or Jerry Bergonzi or Barry Harris, we should take your word?!? 👎🏾
@@MyFeltMusic No! you should look into the original music yourself. You will see these scales but they are not what they seem. It's obvious to me that they are added notes played over certain chords as I said. Why don't you watch the video series I state above - before I criticise anyone I at least try to understand their theory first. It took me 3 years of thinking and studying to work out Parker's statement to Levin and Wilson - and to date no one else has offered any other explaination that stands up to examination or is so elegantly simple in concept.
Bebop review I majored in jazz studies and have transcribed and analyzed numerous solos. Like I said, there’s a reason why numerous reputable educators and musicians speak about the bebop scale...it’s because it’s a legitimate concept.
I am so happy to have found you again. Your Charlie Parker Controversy video lead me here, I recognized your voice. I thought you had died in 2015 Mr. conn6m! I can't wait to view more your videos. Keep doing your work the way you do. Don't listen to ignorant idiots who don't understand your criticism, specificity in research and attention to detail.
Don't forget to check out the Bebop Review facebook page - you'll find some interesting stuff there.
Any book for licks? To learn the language?
Have you checked out Barry Harris?
I was studying with one of Oscar Peterson’s guitar players
and I won’t mention who it was, but he recommended the David Baker How to play Bebop
book. It’s good as an introduction for beginners but the licks and written
solos were corny and boring. I don’t see how anyone could use them. I think he
was just lazy to show me or teach me the way he learned. I don’t know why the
pros would recommend something they probably didn’t use to learn the music. I
think that’s a lazy way teaching this music.
I think a lot of these people 'recommend' on someones reputation. I don't like Baker's series on Bebop; although I do accept his Bebop Scales. I've wasted a lot of my time thinking that's how you have to play because 'everyone said so'. I know now that there are no real experts on true Bebop (1940s style). What you have to do is look at as many people as possible and extract the information that does work.
Being a virtuoso does not logically mean you would be a great teacher or a great person, so sad.
That song you played with the vibes sounded nothing like Bee Bop. I'm sorry folks this is a prime example why learning bop swing or anything from a book is garbage. It is really hard to put expression on paper. There are way to many nuances in playing music.
please give us bebop recomendation books,,,much appreciate
Look on my facebook page plenty of free stuff particularly the June 19 2017 post where you can get Thomas Owens dissertation on Parker and Davy strangename's comment for part 2. facebook.com/BebopReview/?ref=bookmarks
If anyone has been following the comments with Myron Feltner Jr. He claims to be a qualified musician yet does not even bother to understand my theory on the origins of Bebop scales (videos 'the levin wilson controversy). David Baker and the like simply see lines that appear as scales and accept them as such. I spend years trying to understand them which he simply dismisses by not even bothering to spend the time to watch the videos I suggest; and how anyone can claim to be an expert on Bebop without first reading Thomas Owens dissertion is beyond me - at least David Baker did that.
Talk about not knowing what you’re missing! This guy is so far off and probably taking the blue pill. How troubling. Baker’s “How To Play Bebop” series is fantastic.
Like I said if you are happy with them pay no attention to what I say. 201 people have marked this video up against 27 so you are in a minority.
@@bebopreview3187 as if the majority understands bebop! HA!
If people believe Jpcannavo's comment below - may I direct you to my other video on Baker's books HTPB 15.
Hey bud
Woww that solo sounds horrible!!!!
So what is in your opinion a good book for learning bebop?
You cannot learn bebop from a book. However, you can learn 'more' by understanding how the great players approached the music - and the best way to get this understanding (in my opinion) is to listen to the great players and use individual studies on them. You actually have to put the work in yourself and study listen. Watch my video Subscriber news 4 were I get angry on the US publishing firms, then speak about this approach and give some recommendations on study aids. ua-cam.com/video/UK_ZD3MtNgA/v-deo.html
regarding Stan Getz comment - Yes a basic primer to play wrong.
Man, first put the name of this gentleman before to put David Baker´s name. This is completly a wrong vision about the book and music. Jazz is melody, harmony then, but without melody there is nothing. Charlie Parker was fucking that! This guy from the video is very arrogant.
If you have bought the book it's hard to accept how bad it it - just as people who are patrons of You-tube creators find it hard to accept any criticism of those people. If you like the book I am not stopping you using it - but if you do you will never be able to play bebop as the great players of the 1940s.
Also your definition of Jazz is wrong. The definition of Jazz is 'syncopated rhythm with improvisation' Your definition could apply to anything written or played since the 17th century.
Dadwillfixit comment - Awful and uninformed