@Andrew Barrett. Check out Dr. John Mortensen's channel, cedervillemusic. He's the professor of piano performance at that university and is a big proponent of classical improvisation and does a lecture about using jazz to teach classical improvisation. I just love his channel and he will help anyone's playing , as he's teaching freshmen to seniors. His main focus is classical, but he plays jazz too.
True, improvisation and "playing by ear (keyboard harmony)" is not really stressed nowadays for classical pianists like it used to be. there are many classical players out there who can play very difficult pieces by Chopin, Liszt, Rachmaninoff etc. but would have difficulty playing "happy birthday" by ear. Liszt used to take requests and do on the spot renditions of whatever people in the audience asked for. Liberace used to do that too. There are some classical pianists today too like Gabriela Montero who freely improvise. It's a learned skill like any other. Gypsy bands can improvise like nobody's business too - it's not strictly a jazz thing.
People were more talented. Now education is almost free or free. Every idiot is a talent. * Man, read Monet, he was beaten regularly to make the realistic paintings. The Modernists just expended on the classical school. The post-modernists just don't believe in any school
Great video content! Apologies for chiming in, I would appreciate your opinion. Have you researched - Riddleagan Smart Hands Remedy (do a google search)? It is a great one of a kind product for learning piano fast minus the normal expense. Ive heard some super things about it and my mate after many years got cool success with it.
Excellent video content! Sorry for chiming in, I would appreciate your opinion. Have you thought about - Riddleagan Smart Hands Remedy (Have a quick look on google cant remember the place now)? It is an awesome exclusive guide for learning piano fast minus the hard work. Ive heard some interesting things about it and my work buddy got great results with it.
I am a classically trained pianist. Classical music is incredibly demanding in terms of technique, finger placement. You also require an insane amount of accuracy. I tried jazz and couldn’t get my head around it at all. In fact, it made me question my ability as a pianist. At the end of the day, the classical piano and jazz piano are completely different.
Most jazz recordings aren’t even written down. The pianist might tell the others what the key is in. Then the pianist starts playing and the other musicians just listen and play. That’s why during improvised solos sometimes there are those little pauses.
Jazz in some ways is the continuation of classical improvisation. All the great composers from Bach to Chopin were renown for their mastery of improvisation.
Some of you seem to have misunderstood some of by my points. To clarify, I am NOT saying that jazz chords, progressions, and scales are not found in classical music. That would be a ridiculous notion. What I AM saying is that classical students are typically not taught jazz chords, progressions, and scales as a FOUNDATION for classical music. Look at most every classical "method" book, and you learn all 12 major and minor scales, 12 major and minor chords, primary chords, and cadences. For jazz musicians, learning the 2-5-1 progression, turnaround progression, cycle of 5ths progression, rootless voicings, quartal voicings, altered chords, and altered scales are part of the learning foundation.
classical musicians are taught the classical way, and the jazz musicians the jazz way. This i must say needs to change. two different things. the approach is different. the Comparison in the first place is not great. i must say, i play the classical guitar, but that doesn't mean i play music from the 1700s . I play music mostly by living composers, or composers from the 20th century.. The music from this period , very different. What about Atonality ? i agree about improvisation, it is hard/alien when you make the switch first, it is frustrating. it was for me. but as days pass and i listen to more and more Jazz masters its getting better, not great but better, its a slow grind. Your Views seem very biased to be honest. to this i must add, i can say one thing as an instructor, the Classical method need a change, you learn only the tonal way of doing things when you get started . but as you get better, you come across Atonality, serialistic music and that would never be taught. Of course in Music theory you are taught about em stuff but the application ? not so much what needs to change is the method. whats better than a musician who is equally sound in both styles..
Also i must add, there is big misconception about classical musicians. There are a lot of classical musicians , who have been taught in a certain system or board. i wont name them , but most of these school/boards are from Europe. these boards follow a graded system, 1-8 , followed by diplomas. in this , students prepare 3 pieces for each grade, and are given a certificate if they pass the exam ( diplomas can be a different story) nevertheless, They are not too challenging to get by. a lot of Graded classical musicians from these particular schools/boards claim themselves to be classical musicians but have very limited knowledge about classical music altogether (except for the ones who are curious about "how and why" of the pieces they play) . i am giving you a generalised view. i come from a country where those particular boards are blooming. i must say that I am not against that system, its has contributed a lot in music business, but thats about the end of the story
The music education system needs an update in my opinion. where one is taught the value of music , necessary skills , and different styles to bring out the best if the student. why only be a Classical musician, why only jazz, why not both ..... A musician who is versatile (sound in many styles) is someone to look up to. Sadly, we don't live for a 1000 years, but an effort towards that goal is better than sticking to only one particular style
I can't believe that there are still these clichès in 2019. And most of the people still take this shit. The music we have today is the result of the great composers and improvisers of the past, starting from Bach, Mozart, Scarlatti, Chopin, Debussy, Skrjabin, Ravel, Stravinsky just to name a few. The problem is not in the music, is in the damn teaching system that banned the practice of improvisation as it were the "devil".
HAHAHAH, when you improvise in front of your strict classical-trained teacher, they would be saying out loud "SACRILIGEOUS!" Or when you hit the tritone "AH! THE DEVIL NOTE" Hahahaha Just kidding
Ummm I don't know if you know... but basically all of the greatest Romantic and Classical piano composers were phenomenally brilliant improvisers; Chopin improvised many of his pieces, Beethoven improvised at parties, Liszt was known for playing his own spin on pieces and adding colourful and virtuosic cadenzas and passages to his improvisation.
Interesting tips. I am a classically trained pianist, I have a BA in music and a masters in music composition/theory. Understanding theory was never an issue for me, neither was understanding the formula for scales. I can also play by ear and can improvise easily on a melody modulating from key to key. That said, trying to learn the science behind jazz piano has always been a struggle and something that have I finally thrown up my hands with. In an attempt to both learn for myself and teach my students, I own more than 100 jazz CDs and eight different tutorials on how to play jazz piano. All of the piano reference material is confusing to interpret - including the one by Jamie Abersold (I even attended the clinic of his 20 years ago). It is not written in a progressive style and randomly introduces new concepts without relating the previous concept to the next one. It wasn't until I purchased a book of McCoy Tyner solos that were written out that I began to understand what was being played. I could finally see what he was playing against the chord symbols that were written above. #9 is my biggest complaint which ties directly into #7. If you want to teach a classical pianist to play jazz piano telling them to listen, listen, listen is more frustrating than you realize. This is what every jazz musician has told me and in my opinion, it is a way of putting their hand in front of your face and saying, "I really don't want to spend the time with you to explain how to play/interpret jazz piano." I realize that many of the voicings are inversions (often times used because the bass player is covering the root of the chord) and I also understand the principle behind adding extra notes for color. I have no issues with that. Where I have issues is where jazz experts (many that I have asked at contest and festivals where my students have attended), evade your questions. Their answer is listen, listen, listen. Now I realize, that a judge only has a limited amount of time to work with the student; however, that response does a kid no good when they don't even know what they're listening for. Lead sheets are great - but telling the kid to improvise when all you have are four notes of the chord and you need to add more is really confusing. Then, top that off with the fact that the pieces are written in more than two flats to accommodate the trumpets, becomes even more frustrating for pianists that have limited skills and are used to playing in the key of C, G, and F. It is almost as if they have very proud of the fact that they have knowledge that you do not and act like they want to share it. Judges tend to criticize the rhythm section the most, when kids have only had a year if two years of experience playing jazz. If a judge is going to knock your score down because you're not playing jazz correctly, then they better darn well justify it in writing and give examples; otherwise, don't do it. The written comments must reflect the score given. I know, I got off the beaten path - but, hopefully this gives you a better idea of the reason why some classically trained musicians finally walk away from jazz all together.
All true. I have great respect for those with a ability to play good jazz but......there's a reason the "Jazz Type" person cliche is that of pretentious character aloof to others outside their bubble. Many so-called masterclasses by "legends" have little to no practical value, but there's always hundreds of fawning comments from people who seem just to like hearing things they already know.
I am a classically trained pianist and I agree with the struggle on changing to Jazz. It's like learning a new language on the piano that I really don't speak. Everything is different - yet I love the warm and vibrant tones and rhythms that we don't play in classical music.
As a classical musician, when I first played with jazz musicians, I felt like a fish out of water. It was like they were having a conversation in a foreign language. Anything I tried to improvise sounded like the musical equivalent of a 3 year old trying to put a sentence together.
Hot topic :) As a classical pianist, I agree with points 1,2,7 and 9 - there should be more emphasis on improvisation in classical music classes, and more encouraging of active listening. There should be more assignments like, you have learned several pieces by Chopin, now try to play your own song in a similar style using combined phrases (or we could even call 'em riffs) from all the pieces. But I disagree with the notion that classical music is all fifth chords and major scales and the boring three cadences. Many complex chords featured in jazz can be found in works by Debussy or Ravel for instance, and 20th century music is full of unusual scales.
Hmm, a lot of hostility in the comments here. Still a good like/dislike ratio, though, so I guess the people who felt most strongly are just being especially vocal. You have some good points, but some of your examples underestimate the techniques required to play classical music. The word "Classical" has evolved into a broader "catch-all" term that encompasses Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and Contemporary music. That's four centuries. Some of your statements apply strictly to the Classical era (~1750s-1830s)--you imply that classical musicians are just learning and utilizing major/minor scales, arpeggios, and cadences, but really the only classical music that's actually built around those kinds of chords/tonalities is from the Classical era (Mozart, Haydn, etc). Tl;DR: Classical era (1750s-1830s) ≠ Classical music (1600s to the 2000s, though some would argue the timeline is even larger). People who identify themselves as classical pianists/students do not only play the former. #3/#4 - I would argue that a musician who has learned all major/minor scales can easily pick up the scales you mention if they put time into studying them. At the core, the technique is the same--long fingers on the black keys, same hand/wrist movements for turns. It's not really a struggle; it just requires a change in focus. #5 - Chords in classical music are voiced in much more complex ways--(closer to the ones you group with jazz at 5:04)--the later you go chronologically. Listen to Debussy, Ravel, Rachmaninoff. #8 is untrue for anyone who has strictly studied music theory (which, with piano, is more common than you would think). This notation is immediately recognizable to me (and would be to anyone who spent five minutes googling.) #9 - all music requires listening. All music requires studying hours of the right genre to get the 'feel' for it. Classical music is not just about what's playing on the page. It's about interpreting it. That, in a sense, requires as much thought and breakdown as jazz music does. You cannot play Bach the same way you play Mozart or play either of them the same way you play Chopin. If you have a classical piece memorized you are only 10% of the way there. The expression, interpretation, refinement--that all comes next. That's why fifty students can play the same pieces in a piano competition, and yet the people who excel are immediately evident to the judges. This is why #10 feels so callous to me. This is why, I imagine, so many commentators, take issue with this video. You may not say it outright, but it is strongly implied that classical music is unemotional here, or that emotions don't matter. You imply that classical technique is trivial--you play the simplest, most consonant of chords and scales and imply that that's all that there is. I love jazz too. I know you made this video out of good will. But I think some of your wording--your oversimplification, or your association of all classical music with a specific style--comes off here as insensitive. You are completely right in some respects. Improvisation is frightening to anyone who has studied classical strictly before turning to jazz, myself included. Your first point is correct. They are fundamentally different skills. It is certainly not an easy transition between the two. Learning to recognize chords is one thing, but knowing how to break them down--rearrange them, spontaneously, in a way that makes them fresh and stylistically relevant--is another. But please consider that the connotations of some of the words you use comes off with the attitude that jazz is superior. This reminds me of an Adam Neely video where he tried to claim that classical musicians couldn't count (while jazz musicians could). When complexity, technique, or skill of the artists involved in a genre gets questioned, anger is usually the gut response. I can see the point you were trying to make, but this wasn't the way to make it, especially with a title which was manufactured to attract a classical audience.
my thoughts exactly! though jazz certainly has difficult aspects, a lot his points greatly underestimate the complexity of classical music, especially the many diverse eras.
I cringed a lot.. "Bruuuh look a 7th cord I play jazz now" They way he presents things is so simplistic.. and it makes it looks like classicaly trained pianists are incapable of learning these new thing/sounds/rythms. When he said that 2-5-1 doesn't exist in classical music I was so done
@@TheMelopeus he never said 2 5 1 didn't exist in classical it's just the most played progression in jazz he said n it the fundamental with the other basic progression
when he talked ab how classical music lacks different chord progressions i was like wtf there are so many more chords that goes into classical music than one might imagine. like, a simple example would be Beethoven using a flat 2 6 (bII6) chord in like literally the third bar of his famous moonlight sonata.
I totally agree with you! Its a mistake to reduce the complexity of Classical music as it would be to reduce a complexity of any kind of music. A very good jazz piano player can have a lot of problems playing Classical or Pop or Reggae. It's a matter of culture. Any style have their own characteristics. I like Jonny but I think this video is respectfulness.
Reason that why classical pianists struggle to play jazz is that they are not used to do it. It works vice versa - jazz players are struggling with classical piece becouse they are not used to it. It's simple as that.
A pianist can learn a nice Mozart sonata and memorize it well and play it in his sleep, but give him a 32 bar solo on a tune like "all the things you are" in a jam session, he wont know what to do.....jazz, classical....they're different animals...
I find it interesting that at one point in his life, Bill Evans felt helplessly stuck in his playing. As he put it, he locket himself in a room and studied J. S. Bach for hours every day. Which helped him to become very solid harmonically. Which gave him the solid platform he needed to do those wonderful improvisations we so enjoy.
I can't agree with points 3 and 4 which you made: Left hand jumps (similar to stride) are all over the place in classical music. Scales are not played 'straight' in context, but usually only as an exercise. The circle of fifths is used ALL OVER the place in classical music. Pachelbel's Canon in D basically loops over a circle of fifths throughout. A lot of classical era music (Mozart etc) uses the circle of fifths a lot. Turnaround progressions, while they were not known by that name, were also quite common. The 2-5-1 is just the ii-V-I in classical music. The ii is a subdominant, a substitution for the IV chord, and the V is the dominant. In fact, ii(first inversion) - V - I is probably more common in classical music than IV-V-I.
@@jorgeramos2125 I was talking about stride. Listen near the end of Hungarian Rhapsody, about 6-7 minutes in. There's a whole section where he's just basically doing stride in the left hand.
Classically trained pianists make some of the best jazz pianists if they decide to venture into jazz....oscar Peterson, chick corea, herbie hancock were all classically trained...oh, I forgot to add the legendary Keith Jarrett
I’m a classically trained pianist and while studying classical beginning @ 5 yrs of age, began composing & improvising and playing by ear thus not needing music. I’m a self taught improvisationalist and play jazz by ear. So, this guy is mostly referring to those who need to read music to play. Hope this makes sense.
I don’t disagree that a lot of classical musicians struggle playing jazz, but not, by and large, for the reasons you stated.Any advanced classical pianist should not have any difficulty playing the chords or scales found in jazz.Classical music tends to sound easier than it really is to play, whereas jazz often sounds more difficult technically, than it truly is to play.The biggest challenge for the classical musician, in my opinion, is learning how to groove and swing, which is essential for jazz music.
Classical sounds easier than it really is to play because its structure sounds simple compared to jazz.solos in jazz fusion like pat metheny allan holdsworth to name a few
@@juangonzales9335 And classical structures are way more complicated than jazz tho. Sonata form? ABA form? Fugues? Beethoven played around with forms to make it even more complicated. Tthose chord progressions in jazz, however jazz people make it sound complicated, are elementary comparing to those works of Stravinsky, Scheonberg, and all the modern classical masters composers. Classical period music is also about refinement, simplicity, and purity. Jazz focus more on spontaneousness.
@@Guankabun Both classical and jazz have their difficulties.Classical musicians are more technical.They play music exactly as it is written.Jazz musicians are better improvisers.I like classical,but i prefer jazz fusion.It has a wider variety of tones,scales,cords.
I have a few points I would like to add to this rather myopic view of what , in my opinion, are the actual differences between classical and jazz music and why, ultimately, many classical musicians struggle to learn jazz piano. Lets break down a few points before I decide to add my two cents as a jazz/classical pianist myself. 1. Different Approach: I generally agree. Jazz and classical are two different art forms, each requiring different ma nners of study and diligence to achieve mastery. To act like jazz is simply improvisation, as the case is here, is simply not true. Many times original music or special arrangements require lead sheets. Plus, jazz musicians play the head, or the pre composed melody, and then improvise. Honestly, the part where he says jazz musicians are "making it up" was a little perfunctory. Its only half true. Many jazz pianists study certain chord voicings and substitutions, as well as other melodic idiosyncrasies . Its like saying people are just "making it up" when they are speaking. Sure, I am saying what "sounds right" in the moment, but I am also following a set of rules and guidelines in order to speak. 2. Never taught to improvise. While most musicians succumb to the belief that classical is devoid of improvisation, improvisation used to exists frequently in the baroque and early classical era; Bach and Mozart improvised heavily. Sadly it fell out of practice because nobody really knows what improvisation sounded like at the time and thus studying it proves difficult. Granted, improvising in the baroque style is seldom a facet of a modern classical pianists playing. While I dont exactly agree with the perfunctory voicings he uses to demonstrate these topics. I.E. sticking strictly to common practice period harmony and modal/hard bop harmony, it works. 3. Different Technique. Absolutely not. Jazz piano and classical piano technique are essentially identical. You move the fingers muscles and attack the keys in the same way regardless of style. Furthermore, the examples he uses are different exercises. Quite frankly, I would advise all students to warm up on "classical" scales or "classical" arpeggios because they simply work and get the fingers moving regardless of the style. Moving your thumb up and down, as this guy points out, is not exclusive to jazz piano in the least. There are many difficult piano passages in classical which would also benefit from this technique. Also, your points about left hand "exercises" are excruciatingly myopic. Listen to debussy, shostakovitch, or rachmanninov. Many of them used some stride like accompaniment as well. Similarly, Bill Evans uses frequent left hand arpeggiation as intros, for example on his intro to "green dolphin street". 4. Different Scales I could stomach this point if he only talked about scales before impressionism or 20th century music. Many of those musical art forms have the "whole tone scale" or "octotonic/diminished" scale. Generally I agree however. Most scales such as the bebop scales (not mentioned for some reason) and the blue scale simply don't exist in classical music to a significant degree. 5. Different chord progressions. Again, i could stomach this point if he only talked about scales before impressionism or 20th century music, perhaps romanticism too. Whose to say ii V I isnt a cadence. Generally, I agree that jazz, unlike classical, sees many progressions over and over again. Classical, especially on the contemporary end, does have some unusual chords progressions as well. 6. Very different chords. Barely. Has this guy listened to debussy or rachmaninov? Probably not, given that they both have voicings deviating from the simple major triads. If you think jazz chords are just "clusters" than you have some research to do, particularly in the stravisnky, legiti, and eric whitarcre department. I felt rejuvinated when he mentioned rootless voicings however. 7. Never Taught how to color chords. One of the points I actually manged to agree with, but still, this guy acts like you can slap any ol' extention anywhere and it will sound good, but for demonstration purposes, Ill give it a pass. 8. Confusing chord symbols I agree as well. Learning new vocabulary for a different genre is indeed a struggle. 9. Jazz requires more listening. Not quite. Jazz requires different listening. Classical musicians listen as often as jazz musicians do, in my experience, they just arent transcribing as frequently. Their focus is on interpretation because they cannot put on the ol' beethoven record and go from there. 10. Precision versus emotion Not. Even. Close. To act like the simple "just feel it man" attitude is enough to get by. Emotion in jazz and classical is not musically exclusive. With any art form one must both feel the music and not treat it flippantly either. Don't act like simply feeling it will absolve you from mistakes. That said, here are some of my reasons why I think classical musicians fail to grasp learning classical music. 1. Vocabulary Understanding fundamental vocabulary in jazz is key to understanding it inner workings. Many of the lines that appear in jazz simply do not appear in classical. This goes for harmony as well, not just melodic content. 2. Groove The concept of groove, especially for swing, is hard to grasp at first. Swing is something that is hard to put an academic definition on; the best way to understand it is to simply play at jam sessions or listen to famous recordings 3. Reacting in a combo setting. While this point is more for rhythm players, soloists also should stay keen on this. The ability to react, in real time, to what someone in the band played is a challenge. Again, mastering the art of reacting and playing behind a soloist is something that takes careful time and dedication in a live setting. 4. Using jazz as a blanket term While calling both 1930's stride and 70's fusion "jazz" works somewhat, its more complicated. There are certain subgenres of jazz that require different stylistic nuance. Many classical pianists act like applying modal jazz concepts will work no matter what genres. Try using a quartal voicings on east st louis toodle o or "sing sing sing".
Big factor is rhythm and playing by ear. Listening in a whole different way. Earl Garner was an ear player as so many if the great jazz pianists were. Classical musicians are not encouraged to improvise, although back in the times of Bach, improvisation was mandatory. Beethoven was a great improviser and he taught Czerny who in turn taught Liszt who as we know improvised constantly. Piano methods became standardized and nothing was allowed to encourage improvisation as the 19th century closed. But in America they picked up the thread and we continued to improvise in a whole new way.
I don't think Jonny is trying to make a qualitative comparison between jazz and classical (e.g., jazz is better). I think it's more he's trying to address a specific question: e.g., 'I'm a classical pianist and I now want to move into playing jazz. What are some of the differences/challenges I might face'. He's not addressing the question of what a classically untrained jazz pianist would have do to to attempt to become an accomplished classical player. The latter situation would, no doubt, be a huge and difficult undertaking, especially if the pianist in question had very little classical training to start with. In his answering the question at hand (classical pianist moving into jazz), he has clearly simplified and left out many many complexities on the classical side but I suspect that was just to keep the video to a reasonable time. His comparisons on the classical side were just instances or examples - not a comprehensive discussion of the myriad techniques and skills the classical player has mastered; to name but a few: complex fingering and technique in special situations, varied chord types, harmonic analysis, sight reading, comprehension, performance, and interpretation of the many incredibly difficult and complicated works in the piano repertoire.
BINGO Terry. You are absolutely right. I was thinking the same thing. I am a trained classical pianist that at this stage in my life wants to learn jazz too. I was not offended by his comments. There are many things that are "different" but its OK. It's still music. I am enjoying this new-to-me-world of jazz. It's theory is very understandable (my music training) but I'm also realistic that it will take some time AND practice to get it all together.
@Tarik Bey I am a pianist studying at NEC, both classical and jazz. You make many good points and I have huge respect for Jazz pianists for their improvisation skills, but when it comes to strictly tone in classical music standards, stability, intensity, and especially playing legato-connecting one note to another note carefully without making an accent or weakness, finger independence and strength, making piano “sing” like voice, and depth of sound and broadness and warmth of chords, and understanding of forms and drama tension in music, many jazz pianists I know do fall short of the ridiculous high standard of classical (not all). They can play it and get all the notes, but they fail to meet the standard in classical, and they fail to play the music in the classical taste, feel, purity, and stability, and they don't learn enough knowledge about classical music outside of music like classical art, architecture, literature etc. In my experience, if you let a jazz pianist play a Listz transcendental etude or a Rachmaninoff concerto, or a very simple second movement of a Beethoven sonata, they do often fall short (comparing to classical maestros like Horowitz and Argerich). Some jazz pianists I know tend to ignore basic things (some jazz pianists actually hate classical music for some reason) and not practicing enough baroque period music and classical period music: Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. It’s not just “difficulty” or how many notes you play. It’s sometimes the simplest things that are the hardest on piano because you have nothing to hide behind: every note has to be perfectly connected yet independent, like a pearl necklace. Many Jazz pianists I know have trouble playing very slow and simple passages sometimes because those require the most basic classical training acquired from practicing Baroque/classical period music like Bach, Mozart, Beethoven. Slow things requires the most finger strength, intense listening, and practicing. Jazz pianists focus more on playing freely and improvisation. Of course this is a bit of generalizing. And people like Art Tatum and Herbie Hancock ALL received amazing classical training first. But jazz pianists are so much better at playing freely and improvise. Improvisation is a part of classical tradition until modern time. Classical music education today focus too much on perfection and don't focus enough on improvising. Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Liszt, Rachmaninoff, all improvised like crazy. Bach improvised fugues. Imagine that.)The mindset is completely different. Classical pianists are trained to be perfect, refined, and jazz pianists tend to have more laid back attitude which I love. Both are very different music, and both require tremendous skills.
@Tarik Bey Let's relax. Please dm me or lmk if you wanna add me on facebook/instagram so we can talk about this further. We disagree but we all love music. Thank you very much for sharing with me. I really appreciate your passion about music. I agree, classical snobs are annoying, but so are jazz ones who claim they are the best without knowing anything outside of it. With all respect, i am afraid your knowledge might not based on facts, but based on your own assumption and feeling. I know how hard bebop is, but to say it's the hardest...depends on how you define hard. Bach improvised Fugues by HIMSELF. Then it is obvious that Fugue is the hardest form of all music in that regard. I can bring up any examples like music by Bach, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Bartok, and many improvised music in classical music (yes, improvisation and composing were an inseparable part of being a classical musician. Modern Classical musicians don't realize this and they spend so much time on refinement that they ignored this) and so much more. How do you define "difficult"? Do more notes mean more difficult? Is music really about making the most complicated, hardest thing possible, or is music about making music that move people? Sometimes the hardest thing to do is to play very simple lines beautifully. My professor and I spent way more time working on a simple passage in Brahms than on a difficult Rachmaninoff Etude. Some of Miles Davis' most touching lines are literally just straight quarter notes and eighth notes. Also, do you wanna provide sources to back up what you say? Where did Horowitz say that thing which you claimed? I have never seen one jazz pianist being able to play the incredible legato and that touching singing sound Horowitz plays. Everyone can play fast and loud. But not everyone can play so beautifully like Horowitz. You say all jazz pianists blow away classical ones, could you prove that? On what standard? How do you define "good piano playing"? (I love the laid back attitude and spontaneousness of jazz pianists, but I can't compliment on their refinement) Almost all I have heard in classical world is classical pianists always look down on jazz pianists for their lack of technique and understanding of classical music. Almost all i have heard in jazz is that "classical pianists cannot improvise". Both are extremely narrow views. I don't agree with them completely tho, but jazz pianists I know, and even the greats, all tend to have less sophisticated technique especially legato technique, but they are much more spontaneous and fun, and they improvise much better than classical pianists (because classical pianists don't focus on improvisation)as I mentioned in my previous comment. My point is also suggesting that one has to be good in classical in order to be good in jazz. Jazz has its own difficulty classical musicians admire, like the ability to make things up on the spot really takes tremendous work, but the pure level of sophistication and refinement and perfection in jazz's improvised music is no where near classical music that are carefully planned, written, and designed like science, based on 400 years of development. Because one is improvised and one is written and planned! Those are two different approaches! Check Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Bach. Classical musicians have to be responsible for everything classical composers do and understand them all and express them with incredible technique. Jazz is much more spontaneous and that's why I love it. I know jazz can get really technical, but I don't think that's the point. The point is the make music. I don't know why you are trying so hard to make the point that "jazz musicians are the best". That's exactly what many many classical musicians say:"classical musicians are the best and classical music is the hardest". Aren't you being a snob yourself? I think both are hard in their own way, and you cannot compare them like that. Both classical pianists and jazz pianists are great in different ways. Also man, if you want further discussion, feel free to dm me. Sorry for sounding rude. I just can't stand it when people say false things. We are all musicians trying to make beautiful music.
@Tarik Bey Also, please don't get me wrong. I really hate to argue because these are all amazing people and arguing who is better and what's harder is silly. They are all unique. We all love music. I absolutely admire Art Tatum and Herbie Hancock to death like I love their playing. Comparing pure classical music in terms of technique and quality they might not surpass what Horowitz and Rachmaninoff and Yujia play, but their musicality touches me greatly, and they play DIFFERENTLY and they are so unique and are just beautiful souls. And they all started classical! That proves how important classical music training is! I think the most successful people today are the ones who can play classical really well and also improvise like a jazz musician. That I call a true musician. Cheers bro.
I have music university graduation, i can easily and beautifully play chopin, bach beethoven list, mozart, prokofiev, stravinsky etc, but i cant play jazz. I have absolut hearing and i play bossa nova by just hear once time , and any others musics songs i listen first, but i cant play jazz...For me, jazz lives in another universe..I have too much to travel in ligth velocity years time in music , to reach these unique sounds.
Some of this is true; most of it is false. The main differences between classical and jazz are rhythm and improvisation. Classical is concerned with interpreting composed music with balance, precision, and feeling, mostly in strict time except for sections of rubato. The art of great classical performance is extremely difficult to master. Jazz, on the other hand, requires less precision, but the musician needs to "groove", so to speak. Jazz makes use of almost imperceptible micro rhythms that can't really be notated. Also, you're right about improvisation. All the other stuff about chords and scales is utter nonsense unless you're talking about beginner students. Just look at the first 10 bars of Rachmaninoff's 2nd piano concerto, or just do a harmonic analysis of any Bach piece.
Don’t think of it as playing “ jazz” , sit at the piano, and try to play the twelve bar blues with out any sheet music, play by ear, make it up , it’s the 1 4 5 , start by playing in C , C=1 F=4 G =5 , the 145 are always major chords in a major key , it goes Major minor minor major major minor diminished If you are in a minor key, it starts on the 6th degree, so it goes minor diminished major minor minor major major, if you can internalize the 12 bar blues, the next step is to try jazz blues , jazz , is the next step, it is all about the 2 5 1, think of the chord Progression as a canvas that you can add your own thing to, study Satin Doll, look at how the 251 works, jazz people don’t see one chord, they look at it as groups of chords functioning together , look at the 251 as a single building block, it took me over 40 years to really understand, internalize, this, make it second nature, another thing , if you want to be a great player , PLAY, think of it as playing, not practicing, not studying, PLAYING !! Have fun! Try to be honest with yourself, do you really want to be a Player, maybe you want to just practice, maybe just study, I never thought I would be able to get past the 12 bar blues, took me 20 years to Really be “ natural “ you will get there it’s worth it I started out at 11 year old ,with lessons, I’m 59 now,still learning, still getting better, and love it more than ever
The leader of the Modern Jazz Quartet was classically trained John Lewis. Perhaps if classical musicians who wanted to migrate listened to MJQ first, it might make the transition easier. Again, the very slow but incredibly beautiful blues piano of Jimmy Yancey, in particular How Long Blues, might be another starting point.
One thing hard in classical strength to play the piece Also... we classical pianist might not spending time learning our 7th or 6th. We just don't spend time learning you jazz player's progression ... we understand all chords we know 2nd to 7th interval
10 reasons jazz pianist struggle to play classical. 1. Their reading is not good enough. 2. They can’t analyze chord progression or key changing from sheet music. 3. They can’t understand what composers really want from complicate parts out of sheet music. 4. Or even by their ears. 5. They can’t memorize exact millions of notes for at least 2 hrs for solo concert. 6. Their left hand is wayyyy too weak for classical pieces. (So much more happens in classical pieces) 7. Their right hand upper fingers (4 or 5{pinky}) are way too weak also. Or can’t produce the differrent weight and mood out of many right hand fingers playing in the same time to make beautiful melody-line. 8. Rubato. What!!!! Rubato oh! No wayy!!! “What is rubato?” jazz player. Yeah!! Try put metronome on jazz recording and classical recording. Which one are more flexi? Hey that’s what jazz people always try to say they r more flexi? Really? 9. Numbers of jazz pianist gave up on classical before turn to jazz. Yeah! Right! Some of them might found that they more interest in jazz music so they turn. But, yep there r still numbers from who gave up from classical. How much who gave up on jazz and turn to classical? Some of you will argue that cause hell yeah nobody turn to classical cause jazz cool. What ever. 10. Simply they are not skilled enough. There are so many reasons more like they are not patience enough for sure, polyphony music, rich harmonies, technical. I’m too offense on this comment I accept it. Cause I pissed off. Stop compare these. Each of them has it’s own beautiful way. And different sets of skill also. Junk video.
Its the context in which the scale is used......I hate when people say "jazzy chords"...there is no such thing as jazzy chords.....there are many "jazzy chords" in pop music, that doesnt mean they're playin jazz....scriabin music has some complex harmonies, but we all know it ain't jazz....not by a mile
Dan Ordel Noone says that Scriabin composed jazz music. It was simply stated as a fact that he used many of the scales/harmonies and extended chords in his music before jazz was popular, in response to the video saying the opposite. And not just Scriabin, many classical composers at that time and even before were using them in that context along with other things we don't see in jazz (e.g. polyphony, counterpoint) Even Beethoven introduced boogie-woogie syncopated rhythms 80 years ahead of its time. Check his last piano sonata, 2nd movement if you haven't heard it already. Some amazing stuff happening there. The overall tone of the video seems to be that classical music is just some old, outdated basic stuff, and jazz is the progressive more enhanced version, something that is completely ignorant. The next step is atonality, it just shows how far the boundaries of tonal music were stretched by the composers of that time (Scriabin, Liszt, Ravel, Debussy, Stravinsky Bussoni and others).
Classical composers were great improvisers, but the problem is in the way classical students today are taught to approach the piano. I have heard of an exceptionally talented pianist (Julliard graduate) who could not even play happy birthday by ear on a request. What's the point of learning music to such a high standard if one cannot even play the simplest tune without reading the dots? I highly value improvisation, playing by ear etc. since these abilities allow me to freely express myself via music, and so I prefer jazz. That doesn't mean classical is bad; I think it is a good starting point for learning jazz.
Is that a real story? I thought they were testing your hearing skills in conservatory. Heck I'm allmost tone dead (never trained my ear) but I can figure out happy birthday by the intervals in my head. I'm a computer science student who plays the piano :))
Jonny, I just discovered your channel. Pacing is perfect, and I'm blown away. Studied some classical in the past as a total amateur, really wanting all the 7th chords and dive into things like Monk and everything. Thanks for your channel. Like Arnold, I'll be back. :)
When I think about classical pianists crossing over into Jazz, I imagine, if they can learn the different way of approaching the music, that they would be pretty adept in the jazz idiom, even dangerous, in a good way. A number of the pianists who are considered masters at Jazz Piano had a foundation in Classical training anyway, in that they were being trained in the classical idiom for years prior to becoming proficient in Jazz. some of the ones I can think of are, Herbie Hancock, Earl Hines, Oscar Peterson, Bill Evans, Elian Elias, Hiromi, Diana Krall, Renee Rosnes, Ramsey Lewis, Teddy Wilson, Brad Mehldau, Lynne Arriale, Michel Petrucciani, Jessica Williams. All these and many more Jazz pianists were first grounded in Classical music either before they ventured into Jazz or were experimenting with Jazz while still being trained in the classical idiom. I suppose these musicians had to make the move from the classical styles they were familiar with to the components of the jazz vocabulary that they were unfamiliar with. I even have a DVD of interviews and music by Oscar Peterson where he recommends that those aspiring to play Jazz should try to get a grounding in classical music to establish a solid understanding of the instrument and a correct understanding of technique, which would only help their development in Jazz.
I am definitely a jazz pianist but i do play everything. I am a working pianist. I am a well rounded pianist. If i need to play classical I will do it but really my forte is Jazz. It is true. With classical you really have to go by the music and slead sheets. With jazz piano is is a bit different. You take a piece of music then you have to improv on it and then come back to it so people know what you are playing. I do play both acoustic and digital pianos. I really do love the jazz sound. Not dogging classicial at all but I feel if I am going to make classicial and I say make because anyone can play music but we make music if we are making classicial music and putting it together then you had better bee on an acoustic grand and not a digital. But at the end of the day classicial pianists and jazz pianists we can all come together and say that we play one of the hardest instruments ever and we can stand together on many things and relate. Lets keep making music together.
In my opinion this two deferent genre of music classical and and jazz. Are both difficult. If you are in pop he he he he any way. I know jazz musician can play classical like chic corea. Even they cant play as much as a classical pianist . But because the knowledge of music theory they can play that but the problem is. jazz musician love in freedom way improvise. So they can play cassical accourding what they hear. So they can fake the piece . Classical pianist is owsome pianist there skill in reading sheet music is high level . They are perfectionist when it comes to perform piece. So thats why they will struggle to play jazz. This two genre is have a defferent dimension so to all musician both classical and jazz. Dont argue regarding this topic. Johnny point is if classical want to learned jazz . Thanks johnny for this video . I learned a lot. Im a lounge pianist and i learned both genre .
@@spencersworldofmusic9686 I totally agree with this comment. Actually in my opinion if you can play more than one style of music Jenna I did spell that wrong by the way if you can play everything or a taste of everything that is good, and it shows people that you are not just sticking to one style…. It is just like languages. If you know more than just English then that will help you out in the long run but if you just know one language then that is going to hendure your speaking abilities with those who don’t know the language. Same with the styles of music. I know many people who just play gospel and that is all they know but if they can branch out and learn other styles sure they will have to work at it but at least they will know when time to play.
@@chopinfredric3312 neither is harder or easier, they're just different and require different skills, there are many aspects to jazz that are much harder than classical and vice versa, this is just an idiotic pissing contest.
You definitely still learn scales and appregios for jazz. It’s pretty important. You’re also not composing as you go, the music is composed and there is a written head. You just improvise your solo. I’m no expert but having played a little classical and a little jazz... the harmony is the same. The music is the same. Just played and presented differently. Jazz is more rhythmic. Syncopation is important as is improv. Classical is more melodic and tempo and rhythm have a different function.
Big big mistake!you are talking about Easy clasical music! Scales of 7 notes? What!?schoemberg ,bartok ,rachmaninnof! Diferent techinique?nooooooooooo the techinique Is always the same! Totally totally desagree
Fede Primitz that is not the point... studying jazz allows you to have a different feel about harmony.....classical music force you to read pages and pages of someone else. A friend of mine usually plays Chopin as a professional but he is not able to play a simple Beatles song at a friends party! that is ridiculous!
I think one more is lack of "groovy feeling" wich doesnot exist in classical music. I dont agree 100% with #9 because classical also needs listening very much. The reason for most of the problems for classical piano students is that teaching is usually the wrong way (synthetic) with notes, theory and technical stuff first, but not the real music stuff there is in classicals. Most of classical piano students become teachers and the vicious circle continues. (I am a classical pianist - teacher who plays some jazz occasionally)
I call myself a pretty seasoned pianist with only classical training. Every time I try jazz, even the written music, i get the notes easily but putting my right hand and left hand together is a whole different thing. My brain just can't consume those weird beats, and I feel like I am a beginner again. It takes 10 times as much to learn it than to learn some Chopin Etudes. Improvisation is no question!! I admire jazz musicians a lot.
Bill Evans,Keith Jarret,Chic Corea can play classical music and merge them in their jazz playing. I think classical players can do play jazz also because they already have the technique and music theory.
I'm just starting out playing piano, but I quite like to 'improvise' of course if it ever sounds good it's just by chance, but I like to experiment with different rhythms or combinations of notes and often play around like this between more structured practicing.
i guess if you put a part the groove and other specific jazz techniques, the two main difficulties i found trying to play jazz after years of classical music, were scales, not because they were different or more complex in jazz, but just because they were not in my DNA , i.e my fingers wouldn't anticipate the next position, the second one being the structure of chords and progression which again are completely different. But a Jazz player would have exactly the opposite problem if he is not coming from a Classical background. You have actually the same problem within classical music itself if you use to play a lot of Beethoven sonatas and move to Rachmaninov, Ravel or Debussy.
There are a lot of people takings everything very personally in these comments :D He isn't trying to belittle classical or anything... He is just trying to highlight common differences that present themselves in most settings. On a side note, people need to stop thinking of classical (and jazz) as this mystical, god level music... Any focus on a style will inherently bring out certain skills and make you ignore others.
they can explain what they are doing . before i thought jazzer is playing what they want but when i study it all has change to me cause its important to learned the theory you will explore the meaning of music rather than copying original song in jazz you are free to express your self base on the feelings of what you want to express so it is important to learn the theory then apply it and that it the jazz for me thanks jonny i learn a lot from you
In classical, it's all written for the player, so play as it is written. Whereas in Jazz, the song & structure is given. And the player has to digest and understand it well enough to deliver a better rendition of what's given.
Rachmaninov said that he understood what Tatum played, but was unable to do the same. And also 'If this man ever decides to play serious music we're all in trouble.' ... Horowitz sat himself at the piano and began to pay "Tea for Two" for his Jazz counterpart. Thunder and lightening, hail and brimstone, Horowitz finished the piece and looks up immediately at Tatum with an eager set of eyes. "What do you think?" asks the Russian. "Very good. I enjoyed it." comes the answer. Pause. Tatum continues: "Would you like to hear my version of 'Tea for Two'?" "Certainly I would. Go ahead." Tatum gets up and launches into the piece that has always been one of his specialties. Horowitz' mouth drops when he hears what he hears and as soon as the Jazzman finishes: "My God! That was fantastic! Where did you get that transcription? You must give it to me!" "Transcription?" answers Tatum, "That was no transcription. I was just improvising
This video didn't mention syncopation and swing and I had a hard time understanding what swing was and when I should syncopate when improvising. I think it comes down to the jazz groove being felt but when listening and playing classical music, we don't try to feel any groove in it. Also I think jazz has too many constraints when arranging, I read it needs to have those as well as call and response, having to use the blues scale, and having to include improvisation parts and stuff, a lot of rules to adhere to, and it was difficult to include all these rules in my arrangement, I felt. Though the more I listen to jazz, the less it seems to me that these rules I read are mandatory, but I've yet to hear someone say it. I still enjoy listening though.
Thank you, John. YOUR vids are the most helpful of all. THANK YOU for sharing your gifts. I've been an church organist ( CAGO) for 35 years. And also play piano in wineries, ctry clubs, casinos, etc. Organ improv is rarely taught. sitting and "doodling" is not encouraged. Parallel 4 &5, the tritone, aug 2nd are TABOO. Also, a "classically trained" pianists/organists see 3 separate notes- G B & D# not as an augmented G chord. Again, MANY THANKS for your vids.
I disagree, Jonny, I think you haven't looked at Ravel... And Chopin.. about scales ...check out messian, satie..as for 251, check out Haydn, any romantic 19th century composer, Doppler(36251), Brahms... Rootless voicings all over the place. Poulenc uses altered chords. I agree for number 8, takes about 6months to overcome. No 10 is not the message in classical music, interpretation is more important than right notes in classical music. If you listen to different interpreters of any piece they will give quite different renderings. Also I'd like to point out that Bill Evans, Keith Jarrett and a ton of others were classically trained. Thanks for your efforts.
I think Jazz and Classical both take a lot of skill but the difficulty is in different areas. The hardest thing about Jazz for many is effectively improvising over big chords. Meanwhile Classical is largely about precision and complex written passages. It's true that the greats could improvise really well (Bach could even do improv Fugues) but students are taught to play what's on the page. Gershwin is often respected by both Jazz and Classical communities but he's more of an exception (bridging the 2 worlds was a talent of his).
Debussy wrote a few pieces in "cakewalk" style, an early precursor to jazz. The further you look into 20th century American classical music, the influence of jazz is pretty hard to ignore.
Nearly everything written by Nikolai Kapustin. I recommend starting with concert etudes Op.40 and the first two piano sonatas Op.39 and Op.54. There’s also a prelude and fugue and some other pieces by Gulda or Earl Wild’s etudes on Gershwin songs.
Classical musician never taught to improvise is a wrong thing, Beethoven Bach and Mozart are examples of they can improvise on anything you throw them. you are wrong on that point
I know this is a very smart young man he just didn't really think that there would be experience Musicians I'm Not mad about what he said about a monk You are absolutely right and from what I've heard that some of the music never was written down at times I don't think you can put everybody in the same category no matter what music they played yet to give him The benefit of the doubt for trying to help people learn about music lead teacher in the right way of course teach them the right way
@Perlas Negras XII When there is so much good and polished repertoire that you can't learn all in 1 lifetime it's understandable why improv is not important.. You cant improvise better than someone who took his time to think and write down a piece. I personally find composition much more interesting than improvisation.
@@TheMelopeus Ironically the compositions you speak of from much long ago was done by many composers who knew how to improvise, and it is possible, even likely, that some of the greatest compositions were inspired by such improvisation.
The comments here are more interesting than the video. I would suggest that the only answer is..... good classical pianists don't struggle with Jazz - they neither want nor need to learn it. Jazz needs classical training more than the other way around. There's room for both, of course, but I bet any pro classical pianist could improvise fine if they really tried.
Who said classical pianist never taught to improvise? Traditionally, Baroque music has a lot of improvisations. They're called figured bass (Basso Continuo). It has an interval symbol (number) above or below the notes from bass clef (cello score). The "keyboardist" must improvise, turn the symbol into a good accompaniment, just like a modern jazz. But yeah, the way we improvise are different. Because the colour of Baroque music is different from jazz music, even it's different from classic era. And in early classic era, pianist have to improvise when they meet fermata. For example when playing concerto, they play cadenza. The cadenzas are supposed to be pianist improvisations. Traditionally, they improvise the cadenza at that time, but some composers wrote down they improvisations. But you can play your own cadenza btw. The problem is todays teachers only taught they students to read and just read. Only a few teachers taught they students about figured bass in Baroque era or the way how to play cadenza based on the historical performance.
I think if you study "classic" music, you can play everything. You have to consider the entire process, not only a simply c major scale. In" classic" music you study every kind of harmonies and scale...the difference (for me) is the "creativity". Are you a composer? do you like the improvisation? Is the answer is yes the beginning to study jazz not will be to much difficult. Jazz has taken his language from "classic" music too, don't forget it...this is my opinion of course
@@ugodipiazza you’re being subconsciously inflammatory and I was pointing that out. There’s this subconsciously racist belief that classical music is superior to other forms of music. There’s this belief that it’s the “standard.” There are people who legitimately believe this.
Same thing can happen with Jazz pianists trying to play Classical music. Maybe you know Bach, Mozart and Beethoven but do you also know the composers after them? Chopin, Liszt, Rachmaninov, Tchaikovsky, Ravel, and Debussy? Might as well check their musical works.
sorry, you officially lost me the second you said classical piano focuses on precision and not emotion. What makes classical piano difficult is that you require BOTH at an extremely high level to interpret the music on the page. Also, I'm not sure where you get the idea that classical pianists only learn major scales? Anyone playing classical piano at an intermediate level and higher is expected to play all major and minor scales four octaves, along with their arpeggios, plus chromatic and 3rd/6th interval scales at advanced levels. Oh, and different technique? You seem to be confusing modern pop piano with CLASSICAL piano in this critique (just look at sheet music for any of the Romantic piano composers to know that's a load of crap). Classical music definitely doesn't flow in one consistent direction like you're implying here. Every classical pianist learns finger independence and dexterity and a jazz musician isn't executing any magical finger technique that's outside a virtuoso pianists skill set. Ultimately you didn't need 10 ways of saying that jazz pianists improvise off chords and classical pianists don't. You would also come off far less douchy and dismissive of classical piano if you bothered to mention that classical pianists actually read and study music, a pretty useful skill that most jazz musicians don't bother with, and that the actual technical demand for advanced classical music is extremely difficult. In other words, the music is written on a page because it's extremely difficult and requires insane amounts of practice and discipline to master and perform, all things that aren't part of the equation when you improvise on the spot. All that said, I do love jazz and classical music and I completely agree that they require very different mental approaches when it comes to creativity vs virtuosity. But most of what you're saying in this video is extremely misleading to make it seem like jazz is some higher art form compared to the simplistic nature of elementary classical music (easily noticed when you play a 1st graders classical piano exercise followed by a page worth of full jazz riffs). Simply put, they're different forms of music that focus on very different musical skills ranging from easy to hard just like any other art form. No need to passively bash one to make yourself feel better about the other.
Well sheet music difficulty depends. To me it's like mathematics. Some people just grasp it easier than others. Something seen to be complex can be simple if you understand its structure.
@@nik8099 If I understood ryro's comment right, he/she was not saying that "reading sheet music is difficult" but rather "most classical music is written down becouse its kind of music is impossible to improvise". I dont mean you cant imrovise Debussy style stuff wit fancy chord progression and virtuoso stuff, Its definitely possible if you just get used to it. But I mean instead that you simply are not able to make that happen if you want to make long line - complex musical structures in the scale of 5+ minute piece. Amount of imagination needed for it is so big that there have ever been only few muicians in the world who have been able to do it properly. In other words, sheet music is tool to get music going far beyond limits set by improvisation.
The most different in Classical and Jazz is Classical is focusing on sightreading and play at sametime with ton of people and different instrument (that's really hard). Jazz can be freely improvisation compared to Classical that focusing on sharped reading. each one had advantage.
I'm starting a chanel with a trap at lofi music content and I find most of your videos essential for me. Thank you for all the lessons you are providing.
How do you stop classical musician from playing? Take away their sheet music. But no, seriously, there are lots of great improvisers in the classical world as well. Especially back in the day; Beethoven used to have improv CONTESTS with his rivals. Furthermore, classical music is almost never fully diatonic. Even Bach and his predecessors used out-of-key notes, like secondary dominants.
Bach is considered the father of modern harmony. He wouldn't be called that if all he wrote was I-IV-V-I progressions like this guy seems to suggest make up all of classical music.
@@dalsegno1251 bach did not know what he was playing he was making up as experimenting not the same thing. classical music became dogmalate 18th cemtury. this is what he is referring to.
30 years ago, I couldn't hear a C+9+5 progression and let alone doing a simple transcription by ear on a jazz tune....it takes lots of listening, imitations and creativity....knowing a bunch of chords, and harmonization will not turn you into a jazz pianist....
In jazz, you have the same chord progression A 2, 5,1 like he said is a perfect cadence Jazz and classic have the same root so when you analyse the chord progression of a Chopin piece, or a Beethoven piece, you fine the same rules for chord progression The difference is in classic, it will be often more worked, and the reason of why we hear difference is : the chords in jazz don't sound like classical chords
@benjy Bachellerie - I disagree with your last statement. The only real difference between classical music and "jazz" is twofold : the blues idiom and the rhythmic treatment / phrasing. In terms of harmony, the difference lies in the harmonization of the blues idiom; everything else (chord structures, voicings, passing chords, quartal harmony, clusters, etc.) can be found in classical music.
I thought the only difference between jazz and classical was only in the sound, there is this special "jazzy" sound that you instantly recognise as jazz. There are plenty of jazz pieces, which are played from scores and they don't require any improvisation. AND classical musicians used to improvise and apparently were really incredible at it (read biographies of some major composers, especially Mozart and Liszt). I'm a very amateur classical pianist and want to learn to accompany jazz songs (my favourite Julie London songs, most of them). I don't care about improvising, in fact, I don't want to ever do it, and I don't really like listening to jazz musicians "soloing". But I love when a jazz player is able to produce a beautiful accompaniment to a beautiful melody. Or, make a beautiful arrangement. Or play variations on a well-known theme. I'm trying to find some videos explaining jazz theory from the very beginning to those who know zero theory, and then explain how to find chords for a melody and how to play them so it sounds a bit more than basic. I cannot find anything like that on UA-cam.... so frustrating!!
I always thought Jazz in general sounds more uniform in rhythm, tone, and chord choices. Jazz to me sounds like improvising over a set chord progression, and classical is more likely to go somewhere you didn't expect. I love classical/cinematic and jazz is okay to me. I like cinematic jazz.
Hi Jonny thanks for the very informative video, while some of it can seem obvious, it was presented in a thoughtful way with great musical examples. Would you be able to recommend a good way to practice the turn technique you mention ?
jtmarinuk Thanks! You can learn more about the turn technique in our jazz improv courses at PianoWithJonny.com 😊 We have a number of courses that cover it in more detail.
Jonny, you always seem to be enjoying yourself while playing the piano. I wish I could enjoy myself (like you do) and not have to worry about my fingers landing on wrong notes some day!
The fact that you're demonstrating different jazz techniques but not classical techniques makes me think that you are more of a proponent for jazz than you are classical. I would challenge that you should make the effort to incorporate different music influences so that more diversity can be shown in your playing. I happen to be both a classical and jazz player and enthusiast. Instead of making the point of the struggles of going from playing classical to jazz, why not demonstrate more versatility on how you can do both to broaden your music vocabulary. You would be hard pressed to find UA-cam videos on breaking down classical licks but there's a hundred videos on jazz licks.
Yup. UA-cam has some great Kwik-Jazz channels, but no equivalent for classical. Probably to cater to those who just want to pick up dates. You can learn enough jazz to wow a girl/guy in a couple months - well worth the effort. Not so classical!
Someone needs to make a video titled 10 reasons why Jazz musicians struggle to play Classical. Start with all 48 Preludes and Fugues from Bach's Well Tempered Clavier, Books 1 and 2, make a decent recording of it that's respectable, like Keith Jarrett has done for instance. I have the utmost respect for an artist that has mastered both, but realistically, I think a relative few of us out here have had such a priveleged head start. It never hurts to try, whichever way your heart and passion leads you. I think though to imply that classical musicians don't feel or use emotion when they play is pretty silly. I don't think a classical artist would bother dedicating so many years learning other people's music if they weren't feel anything. Isn't that the point?
Jonny, excellent video. I play classical and jazz GUITAR nevertheless I got a lot of useful insights from you. Very applicable to the guitar. Thanks so much!
First off, I appreciate this channel and I've learned a lot about jazz from Jonny. That said, (and this is understandable) Jonny's knowledge about classical music is limited compared to jazz. Firstly, there is improvisation in classical music. Look into performers like Roland Dyens, Gabriela Montero and Wayne Marshall, just to name a few. Virtually any pro organist or continuo player in a baroque ensemble improvises. The difference is in jazz, improvisation is always the format, in classical music it varies, (this is actually the reason I prefer the engineered structures of classical music, because the format can be a lot of different things, with jazz you always know what the format will be, it is going to be soloing all the time). I also want to point out that the professional classical musicians who just interpret works, have virtually all started music before the age of 10. There is essentially zero chance of becoming pro if one starts later than this. In jazz a person can start at almost any age, learn to improvise and even become pro. So technically just interpreting the classical works is more difficult to do. I will agree many classical musicians struggle to play jazz, but not to the extent that jazz musicians struggle to play classical (to a high standard). There are a lot of musicians that can do both. The idea that in classical they only want precision and not emotion is just wrong. As Beethoven said '"to play a wrong note is insignificant; to play without passion is inexcusable." Classical music listeners want emotion too :) Finally your ideas about classical music scales and chords are only applicable to beginners, and you speak as though you are unaware of any classical music past the mid 1800's. But even with earlier classical like Bach his music doesn't even technically use chords, it uses counterpoint and the resulting harmonies are as colorful and complex as anything that occurs in the world of jazz.
How can you say classical musicians doesn’t have emotion? You can not perform Bach or pieces from the romance era if you don’t phrase and add you inner thoughts and emotions to the music. It’s not music if it doesn’t have any emotion. You’re clearly a jazz-musician...
I love both. But classical music require precise execution in consistant manner, it require musical reasoning/ analysis understanding the piece. You never play the same jazz piece the same ways everytime, as jazz is more like a language you speak how you feel and think at that particular moment.
The problem is both of them hard. Because i learn piano by myself. And i just improvised the shit out of a song. And i like classical techniques because it can make every song seems so beautiful. But jazz is really hard to use in normal pop song. But it still fun to learn
Once upon a time, there was a lot of improvisation in classical music, but today it seems to be rarely taught and seldom heard.
@Andrew Barrett.
Check out Dr. John Mortensen's channel, cedervillemusic. He's the professor of piano performance at that university and is a big proponent of classical improvisation and does a lecture about using jazz to teach classical improvisation.
I just love his channel and he will help anyone's playing , as he's teaching freshmen to seniors. His main focus is classical, but he plays jazz too.
True, improvisation and "playing by ear (keyboard harmony)" is not really stressed nowadays for classical pianists like it used to be. there are many classical players out there who can play very difficult pieces by Chopin, Liszt, Rachmaninoff etc. but would have difficulty playing "happy birthday" by ear. Liszt used to take requests and do on the spot renditions of whatever people in the audience asked for. Liberace used to do that too. There are some classical pianists today too like Gabriela Montero who freely improvise. It's a learned skill like any other. Gypsy bands can improvise like nobody's business too - it's not strictly a jazz thing.
People were more talented.
Now education is almost free or free.
Every idiot is a talent.
* Man, read Monet, he was beaten regularly to make the realistic paintings.
The Modernists just expended on the classical school.
The post-modernists just don't believe in any school
Great video content! Apologies for chiming in, I would appreciate your opinion. Have you researched - Riddleagan Smart Hands Remedy (do a google search)? It is a great one of a kind product for learning piano fast minus the normal expense. Ive heard some super things about it and my mate after many years got cool success with it.
Excellent video content! Sorry for chiming in, I would appreciate your opinion. Have you thought about - Riddleagan Smart Hands Remedy (Have a quick look on google cant remember the place now)? It is an awesome exclusive guide for learning piano fast minus the hard work. Ive heard some interesting things about it and my work buddy got great results with it.
I am a classically trained pianist. Classical music is incredibly demanding in terms of technique, finger placement. You also require an insane amount of accuracy. I tried jazz and couldn’t get my head around it at all. In fact, it made me question my ability as a pianist. At the end of the day, the classical piano and jazz piano are completely different.
Most jazz recordings aren’t even written down. The pianist might tell the others what the key is in. Then the pianist starts playing and the other musicians just listen and play. That’s why during improvised solos sometimes there are those little pauses.
Jazz in some ways is the continuation of classical improvisation. All the great composers from Bach to Chopin were renown for their mastery of improvisation.
Is there any human can play both at high level?
@@billy.7113 Keith Emerson
@@nigelspandex2877 yeah?
Some of you seem to have misunderstood some of by my points. To clarify, I am NOT saying that jazz chords, progressions, and scales are not found in classical music. That would be a ridiculous notion. What I AM saying is that classical students are typically not taught jazz chords, progressions, and scales as a FOUNDATION for classical music. Look at most every classical "method" book, and you learn all 12 major and minor scales, 12 major and minor chords, primary chords, and cadences. For jazz musicians, learning the 2-5-1 progression, turnaround progression, cycle of 5ths progression, rootless voicings, quartal voicings, altered chords, and altered scales are part of the learning foundation.
Is this topyc is sensitive to talk about?
classical musicians are taught the classical way, and the jazz musicians the jazz way. This i must say needs to change.
two different things.
the approach is different.
the Comparison in the first place is not great.
i must say, i play the classical guitar, but that doesn't mean i play music from the 1700s .
I play music mostly by living composers, or composers from the 20th century..
The music from this period , very different.
What about Atonality ?
i agree about improvisation, it is hard/alien when you make the switch first, it is frustrating. it was for me.
but as days pass and i listen to more and more Jazz masters its getting better, not great but better, its a slow grind.
Your Views seem very biased to be honest.
to this i must add,
i can say one thing as an instructor,
the Classical method need a change,
you learn only the tonal way of doing things when you get started . but as you get better, you come across Atonality, serialistic music and that would never be taught. Of course in Music theory you are taught about em stuff but the application ? not so much
what needs to change is the method.
whats better than a musician who is equally sound in both styles..
Also i must add,
there is big misconception about classical musicians.
There are a lot of classical musicians , who have been taught in a certain system or board.
i wont name them , but most of these school/boards are from Europe.
these boards follow a graded system, 1-8 , followed by diplomas. in this , students prepare 3 pieces for each grade, and are given a certificate if they pass the exam ( diplomas can be a different story) nevertheless, They are not too challenging to get by.
a lot of Graded classical musicians from these particular schools/boards claim themselves to be classical musicians but have very limited knowledge about classical music altogether (except for the ones who are curious about "how and why" of the pieces they play) .
i am giving you a generalised view.
i come from a country where those particular boards are blooming. i must say that I am not against that system, its has contributed a lot in music business, but thats about the end of the story
The music education system needs an update in my opinion.
where one is taught the value of music , necessary skills , and different styles to bring out the best if the student.
why only be a Classical musician, why only jazz,
why not both .....
A musician who is versatile (sound in many styles) is someone to look up to.
Sadly, we don't live for a 1000 years, but an effort towards that goal is better than sticking to only one particular style
I can't believe that there are still these clichès in 2019. And most of the people still take this shit. The music we have today is the result of the great composers and improvisers of the past, starting from Bach, Mozart, Scarlatti, Chopin, Debussy, Skrjabin, Ravel, Stravinsky just to name a few. The problem is not in the music, is in the damn teaching system that banned the practice of improvisation as it were the "devil".
Bach was known to be able to improvise fugues... IMPROVISE..... FUGUES!!!
I'd like to give you 1000 thumbs up but I can't ;)
HAHAHAH, when you improvise in front of your strict classical-trained teacher, they would be saying out loud "SACRILIGEOUS!" Or when you hit the tritone "AH! THE DEVIL NOTE" Hahahaha Just kidding
The education system is not banning the improvisation.
They just simply OMITTED.
LMAO
Ummm I don't know if you know... but basically all of the greatest Romantic and Classical piano composers were phenomenally brilliant improvisers; Chopin improvised many of his pieces, Beethoven improvised at parties, Liszt was known for playing his own spin on pieces and adding colourful and virtuosic cadenzas and passages to his improvisation.
I thought the only difference between Jazz and Classical players where the funny faces Jazz musicians make when the hit some cool funky chords.
Also the noise that they make I haven't heard a classical pianist make funny noises or loud sound when the airplane do you always keep a serious look
improvisors always make funny faces whether it’s classical or jazz
Funny faces are made when someone plays something crazy in an improvisation.
We call that the stank face
Because with jazz it’s so formally informal that it’s very easy to use these funny sounds.
Interesting tips. I am a classically trained pianist, I have a BA in music and a masters in music composition/theory. Understanding theory was never an issue for me, neither was understanding the formula for scales. I can also play by ear and can improvise easily on a melody modulating from key to key. That said, trying to learn the science behind jazz piano has always been a struggle and something that have I finally thrown up my hands with. In an attempt to both learn for myself and teach my students, I own more than 100 jazz CDs and eight different tutorials on how to play jazz piano. All of the piano reference material is confusing to interpret - including the one by Jamie Abersold (I even attended the clinic of his 20 years ago). It is not written in a progressive style and randomly introduces new concepts without relating the previous concept to the next one. It wasn't until I purchased a book of McCoy Tyner solos that were written out that I began to understand what was being played. I could finally see what he was playing against the chord symbols that were written above. #9 is my biggest complaint which ties directly into #7. If you want to teach a classical pianist to play jazz piano telling them to listen, listen, listen is more frustrating than you realize. This is what every jazz musician has told me and in my opinion, it is a way of putting their hand in front of your face and saying, "I really don't want to spend the time with you to explain how to play/interpret jazz piano." I realize that many of the voicings are inversions (often times used because the bass player is covering the root of the chord) and I also understand the principle behind adding extra notes for color. I have no issues with that. Where I have issues is where jazz experts (many that I have asked at contest and festivals where my students have attended), evade your questions. Their answer is listen, listen, listen. Now I realize, that a judge only has a limited amount of time to work with the student; however, that response does a kid no good when they don't even know what they're listening for. Lead sheets are great - but telling the kid to improvise when all you have are four notes of the chord and you need to add more is really confusing. Then, top that off with the fact that the pieces are written in more than two flats to accommodate the trumpets, becomes even more frustrating for pianists that have limited skills and are used to playing in the key of C, G, and F. It is almost as if they have very proud of the fact that they have knowledge that you do not and act like they want to share it. Judges tend to criticize the rhythm section the most, when kids have only had a year if two years of experience playing jazz. If a judge is going to knock your score down because you're not playing jazz correctly, then they better darn well justify it in writing and give examples; otherwise, don't do it. The written comments must reflect the score given. I know, I got off the beaten path - but, hopefully this gives you a better idea of the reason why some classically trained musicians finally walk away from jazz all together.
All true. I have great respect for those with a ability to play good jazz but......there's a reason the "Jazz Type" person cliche is that of pretentious character aloof to others outside their bubble. Many so-called masterclasses by "legends" have little to no practical value, but there's always hundreds of fawning comments from people who seem just to like hearing things they already know.
Hi, what was the McCoy Tyner book called? I want to check it out
I am a classically trained pianist and I agree with the struggle on changing to Jazz. It's like learning a new language on the piano that I really don't speak. Everything is different - yet I love the warm and vibrant tones and rhythms that we don't play in classical music.
As a classical musician, when I first played with jazz musicians, I felt like a fish out of water. It was like they were having a conversation in a foreign language. Anything I tried to improvise sounded like the musical equivalent of a 3 year old trying to put a sentence together.
Hot topic :) As a classical pianist, I agree with points 1,2,7 and 9 - there should be more emphasis on improvisation in classical music classes, and more encouraging of active listening. There should be more assignments like, you have learned several pieces by Chopin, now try to play your own song in a similar style using combined phrases (or we could even call 'em riffs) from all the pieces. But I disagree with the notion that classical music is all fifth chords and major scales and the boring three cadences. Many complex chords featured in jazz can be found in works by Debussy or Ravel for instance, and 20th century music is full of unusual scales.
of course i agree
Jazz was soooo hard for me coming from classical. But now that I’m here, I’m never going back.
Hmm, a lot of hostility in the comments here. Still a good like/dislike ratio, though, so I guess the people who felt most strongly are just being especially vocal. You have some good points, but some of your examples underestimate the techniques required to play classical music.
The word "Classical" has evolved into a broader "catch-all" term that encompasses Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and Contemporary music. That's four centuries. Some of your statements apply strictly to the Classical era (~1750s-1830s)--you imply that classical musicians are just learning and utilizing major/minor scales, arpeggios, and cadences, but really the only classical music that's actually built around those kinds of chords/tonalities is from the Classical era (Mozart, Haydn, etc).
Tl;DR: Classical era (1750s-1830s) ≠ Classical music (1600s to the 2000s, though some would argue the timeline is even larger). People who identify themselves as classical pianists/students do not only play the former.
#3/#4 - I would argue that a musician who has learned all major/minor scales can easily pick up the scales you mention if they put time into studying them. At the core, the technique is the same--long fingers on the black keys, same hand/wrist movements for turns. It's not really a struggle; it just requires a change in focus.
#5 - Chords in classical music are voiced in much more complex ways--(closer to the ones you group with jazz at 5:04)--the later you go chronologically. Listen to Debussy, Ravel, Rachmaninoff.
#8 is untrue for anyone who has strictly studied music theory (which, with piano, is more common than you would think). This notation is immediately recognizable to me (and would be to anyone who spent five minutes googling.)
#9 - all music requires listening. All music requires studying hours of the right genre to get the 'feel' for it. Classical music is not just about what's playing on the page. It's about interpreting it. That, in a sense, requires as much thought and breakdown as jazz music does. You cannot play Bach the same way you play Mozart or play either of them the same way you play Chopin. If you have a classical piece memorized you are only 10% of the way there. The expression, interpretation, refinement--that all comes next. That's why fifty students can play the same pieces in a piano competition, and yet the people who excel are immediately evident to the judges.
This is why #10 feels so callous to me. This is why, I imagine, so many commentators, take issue with this video. You may not say it outright, but it is strongly implied that classical music is unemotional here, or that emotions don't matter. You imply that classical technique is trivial--you play the simplest, most consonant of chords and scales and imply that that's all that there is. I love jazz too. I know you made this video out of good will. But I think some of your wording--your oversimplification, or your association of all classical music with a specific style--comes off here as insensitive.
You are completely right in some respects. Improvisation is frightening to anyone who has studied classical strictly before turning to jazz, myself included. Your first point is correct. They are fundamentally different skills. It is certainly not an easy transition between the two. Learning to recognize chords is one thing, but knowing how to break them down--rearrange them, spontaneously, in a way that makes them fresh and stylistically relevant--is another.
But please consider that the connotations of some of the words you use comes off with the attitude that jazz is superior. This reminds me of an Adam Neely video where he tried to claim that classical musicians couldn't count (while jazz musicians could). When complexity, technique, or skill of the artists involved in a genre gets questioned, anger is usually the gut response. I can see the point you were trying to make, but this wasn't the way to make it, especially with a title which was manufactured to attract a classical audience.
my thoughts exactly! though jazz certainly has difficult aspects, a lot his points greatly underestimate the complexity of classical music, especially the many diverse eras.
I cringed a lot.. "Bruuuh look a 7th cord I play jazz now" They way he presents things is so simplistic.. and it makes it looks like classicaly trained pianists are incapable of learning these new thing/sounds/rythms. When he said that 2-5-1 doesn't exist in classical music I was so done
@@TheMelopeus he never said 2 5 1 didn't exist in classical it's just the most played progression in jazz he said n it the fundamental with the other basic progression
when he talked ab how classical music lacks different chord progressions i was like wtf
there are so many more chords that goes into classical music than one might imagine. like, a simple example would be Beethoven using a flat 2 6 (bII6) chord in like literally the third bar of his famous moonlight sonata.
I totally agree with you! Its a mistake to reduce the complexity of Classical music as it would be to reduce a complexity of any kind of music. A very good jazz piano player can have a lot of problems playing Classical or Pop or Reggae. It's a matter of culture. Any style have their own characteristics. I like Jonny but I think this video is respectfulness.
Reason that why classical pianists struggle to play jazz is that they are not used to do it. It works vice versa - jazz players are struggling with classical piece becouse they are not used to it. It's simple as that.
I mean, you're not wrong.
A pianist can learn a nice Mozart sonata and memorize it well and play it in his sleep, but give him a 32 bar solo on a tune like "all the things you are" in a jam session, he wont know what to do.....jazz, classical....they're different animals...
@Hi ! ....jazz has always been more fun.....so much freedom, so much free will.....
my favourite comment
people learn and are taught differently and play different things.
pretty much all good jazz pianists play classical at a high level
I find it interesting that at one point in his life, Bill Evans felt helplessly stuck in his playing. As he put it, he locket himself in a room and studied J. S. Bach for hours every day. Which helped him to become very solid harmonically. Which gave him the solid platform he needed to do those wonderful improvisations we so enjoy.
I can't agree with points 3 and 4 which you made:
Left hand jumps (similar to stride) are all over the place in classical music. Scales are not played 'straight' in context, but usually only as an exercise.
The circle of fifths is used ALL OVER the place in classical music. Pachelbel's Canon in D basically loops over a circle of fifths throughout. A lot of classical era music (Mozart etc) uses the circle of fifths a lot. Turnaround progressions, while they were not known by that name, were also quite common. The 2-5-1 is just the ii-V-I in classical music. The ii is a subdominant, a substitution for the IV chord, and the V is the dominant. In fact, ii(first inversion) - V - I is probably more common in classical music than IV-V-I.
It's mostly a clickbait video, so it's not that surprising that Johnny gets a lot of stuff wrong.
Tell me more about walking bass lines in Vivaldi’s pieces
@@jorgeramos2125 I was talking about stride. Listen near the end of Hungarian Rhapsody, about 6-7 minutes in. There's a whole section where he's just basically doing stride in the left hand.
Great stuff! People often joke about me needing to “recover” from being classically-trained.
Classically trained pianists make some of the best jazz pianists if they decide to venture into jazz....oscar Peterson, chick corea, herbie hancock were all classically trained...oh, I forgot to add the legendary Keith Jarrett
@@Bruce.-Wayne because they were recovered from classically trained
@@Bruce.-Wayne Brad Mehldau!
I’m a classically trained pianist and while studying classical beginning @ 5 yrs of age, began composing & improvising and playing by ear thus not needing music. I’m a self taught improvisationalist and play jazz by ear. So, this guy is mostly referring to those who need to read music to play. Hope this makes sense.
I don’t disagree that a lot of classical musicians struggle playing jazz, but not, by and large, for the reasons you stated.Any advanced classical pianist should not have any difficulty playing the chords or scales found in jazz.Classical music tends to sound easier than it really is to play, whereas jazz often sounds more difficult technically, than it truly is to play.The biggest challenge for the classical musician, in my opinion, is learning how to groove and swing, which is essential for jazz music.
I agree
Classical sounds easier than it really is to play because its structure sounds simple compared to jazz.solos in jazz fusion like pat metheny allan holdsworth to name a few
@@juangonzales9335 And classical structures are way more complicated than jazz tho. Sonata form? ABA form? Fugues? Beethoven played around with forms to make it even more complicated. Tthose chord progressions in jazz, however jazz people make it sound complicated, are elementary comparing to those works of Stravinsky, Scheonberg, and all the modern classical masters composers. Classical period music is also about refinement, simplicity, and purity. Jazz focus more on spontaneousness.
@@Guankabun Both classical and jazz have their difficulties.Classical musicians are more technical.They play music exactly as it is written.Jazz musicians are better improvisers.I like classical,but i prefer jazz fusion.It has a wider variety of tones,scales,cords.
Its not about knowing how to play, most classical pianist know how to use these technics but lacks that swing way to interpretate jazz
I have a few points I would like to add to this rather myopic view of what , in my opinion, are the actual differences between classical and jazz music and why, ultimately, many classical musicians struggle to learn jazz piano. Lets break down a few points before I decide to add my two cents as a jazz/classical pianist myself.
1. Different Approach:
I generally agree. Jazz and classical are two different art forms, each requiring different ma nners of study and diligence to achieve mastery. To act like jazz is simply improvisation, as the case is here, is simply not true. Many times original music or special arrangements require lead sheets. Plus, jazz musicians play the head, or the pre composed melody, and then improvise. Honestly, the part where he says jazz musicians are "making it up" was a little perfunctory. Its only half true. Many jazz pianists study certain chord voicings and substitutions, as well as other melodic idiosyncrasies . Its like saying people are just "making it up" when they are speaking. Sure, I am saying what "sounds right" in the moment, but I am also following a set of rules and guidelines in order to speak.
2. Never taught to improvise.
While most musicians succumb to the belief that classical is devoid of improvisation, improvisation used to exists frequently in the baroque and early classical era; Bach and Mozart improvised heavily. Sadly it fell out of practice because nobody really knows what improvisation sounded like at the time and thus studying it proves difficult. Granted, improvising in the baroque style is seldom a facet of a modern classical pianists playing. While I dont exactly agree with the perfunctory voicings he uses to demonstrate these topics. I.E. sticking strictly to common practice period harmony and modal/hard bop harmony, it works.
3. Different Technique.
Absolutely not. Jazz piano and classical piano technique are essentially identical. You move the fingers muscles and attack the keys in the same way regardless of style. Furthermore, the examples he uses are different exercises. Quite frankly, I would advise all students to warm up on "classical" scales or "classical" arpeggios because they simply work and get the fingers moving regardless of the style. Moving your thumb up and down, as this guy points out, is not exclusive to jazz piano in the least. There are many difficult piano passages in classical which would also benefit from this technique. Also, your points about left hand "exercises" are excruciatingly myopic. Listen to debussy, shostakovitch, or rachmanninov. Many of them used some stride like accompaniment as well. Similarly, Bill Evans uses frequent left hand arpeggiation as intros, for example on his intro to "green dolphin street".
4. Different Scales
I could stomach this point if he only talked about scales before impressionism or 20th century music. Many of those musical art forms have the "whole tone scale" or "octotonic/diminished" scale. Generally I agree however. Most scales such as the bebop scales (not mentioned for some reason) and the blue scale simply don't exist in classical music to a significant degree.
5. Different chord progressions.
Again, i could stomach this point if he only talked about scales before impressionism or 20th century music, perhaps romanticism too. Whose to say ii V I isnt a cadence. Generally, I agree that jazz, unlike classical, sees many progressions over and over again. Classical, especially on the contemporary end, does have some unusual chords progressions as well.
6. Very different chords.
Barely. Has this guy listened to debussy or rachmaninov? Probably not, given that they both have voicings deviating from the simple major triads. If you think jazz chords are just "clusters" than you have some research to do, particularly in the stravisnky, legiti, and eric whitarcre department. I felt rejuvinated when he mentioned rootless voicings however.
7. Never Taught how to color chords.
One of the points I actually manged to agree with, but still, this guy acts like you can slap any ol' extention anywhere and it will sound good, but for demonstration purposes, Ill give it a pass.
8. Confusing chord symbols
I agree as well. Learning new vocabulary for a different genre is indeed a struggle.
9. Jazz requires more listening.
Not quite. Jazz requires different listening. Classical musicians listen as often as jazz musicians do, in my experience, they just arent transcribing as frequently. Their focus is on interpretation because they cannot put on the ol' beethoven record and go from there.
10. Precision versus emotion
Not. Even. Close. To act like the simple "just feel it man" attitude is enough to get by. Emotion in jazz and classical is not musically exclusive. With any art form one must both feel the music and not treat it flippantly either. Don't act like simply feeling it will absolve you from mistakes.
That said, here are some of my reasons why I think classical musicians fail to grasp learning classical music.
1. Vocabulary
Understanding fundamental vocabulary in jazz is key to understanding it inner workings. Many of the lines that appear in jazz simply do not appear in classical. This goes for harmony as well, not just melodic content.
2. Groove
The concept of groove, especially for swing, is hard to grasp at first. Swing is something that is hard to put an academic definition on; the best way to understand it is to simply play at jam sessions or listen to famous recordings
3. Reacting in a combo setting.
While this point is more for rhythm players, soloists also should stay keen on this. The ability to react, in real time, to what someone in the band played is a challenge. Again, mastering the art of reacting and playing behind a soloist is something that takes careful time and dedication in a live setting.
4. Using jazz as a blanket term
While calling both 1930's stride and 70's fusion "jazz" works somewhat, its more complicated. There are certain subgenres of jazz that require different stylistic nuance. Many classical pianists act like applying modal jazz concepts will work no matter what genres. Try using a quartal voicings on east st louis toodle o or "sing sing sing".
Big factor is rhythm and playing by ear. Listening in a whole different way. Earl Garner was an ear player as so many if the great jazz pianists were. Classical musicians are not encouraged to improvise, although back in the times of Bach, improvisation was mandatory. Beethoven was a great improviser and he taught Czerny who in turn taught Liszt who as we know improvised constantly. Piano methods became standardized and nothing was allowed to encourage improvisation as the 19th century closed. But in America they picked up the thread and we continued to improvise in a whole new way.
I don't think Jonny is trying to make a qualitative comparison between jazz and classical (e.g., jazz is better). I think it's more he's trying to address a specific question: e.g., 'I'm a classical pianist and I now want to move into playing jazz. What are some of the differences/challenges I might face'. He's not addressing the question of what a classically untrained jazz pianist would have do to to attempt to become an accomplished classical player. The latter situation would, no doubt, be a huge and difficult undertaking, especially if the pianist in question had very little classical training to start with.
In his answering the question at hand (classical pianist moving into jazz), he has clearly simplified and left out many many complexities on the classical side but I suspect that was just to keep the video to a reasonable time. His comparisons on the classical side were just instances or examples - not a comprehensive discussion of the myriad techniques and skills the classical player has mastered; to name but a few: complex fingering and technique in special situations, varied chord types, harmonic analysis, sight reading, comprehension, performance, and interpretation of the many incredibly difficult and complicated works in the piano repertoire.
BINGO Terry. You are absolutely right. I was thinking the same thing. I am a trained classical pianist that at this stage in my life wants to learn jazz too. I was not offended by his comments. There are many things that are "different" but its OK. It's still music. I am enjoying this new-to-me-world of jazz. It's theory is very understandable (my music training) but I'm also realistic that it will take some time AND practice to get it all together.
@Tarik Bey I am a pianist studying at NEC, both classical and jazz. You make many good points and I have huge respect for Jazz pianists for their improvisation skills, but when it comes to strictly tone in classical music standards, stability, intensity, and especially playing legato-connecting one note to another note carefully without making an accent or weakness, finger independence and strength, making piano “sing” like voice, and depth of sound and broadness and warmth of chords, and understanding of forms and drama tension in music, many jazz pianists I know do fall short of the ridiculous high standard of classical (not all). They can play it and get all the notes, but they fail to meet the standard in classical, and they fail to play the music in the classical taste, feel, purity, and stability, and they don't learn enough knowledge about classical music outside of music like classical art, architecture, literature etc. In my experience, if you let a jazz pianist play a Listz transcendental etude or a Rachmaninoff concerto, or a very simple second movement of a Beethoven sonata, they do often fall short (comparing to classical maestros like Horowitz and Argerich). Some jazz pianists I know tend to ignore basic things (some jazz pianists actually hate classical music for some reason) and not practicing enough baroque period music and classical period music: Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. It’s not just “difficulty” or how many notes you play. It’s sometimes the simplest things that are the hardest on piano because you have nothing to hide behind: every note has to be perfectly connected yet independent, like a pearl necklace. Many Jazz pianists I know have trouble playing very slow and simple passages sometimes because those require the most basic classical training acquired from practicing Baroque/classical period music like Bach, Mozart, Beethoven. Slow things requires the most finger strength, intense listening, and practicing. Jazz pianists focus more on playing freely and improvisation. Of course this is a bit of generalizing. And people like Art Tatum and Herbie Hancock ALL received amazing classical training first. But jazz pianists are so much better at playing freely and improvise. Improvisation is a part of classical tradition until modern time. Classical music education today focus too much on perfection and don't focus enough on improvising. Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Liszt, Rachmaninoff, all improvised like crazy. Bach improvised fugues. Imagine that.)The mindset is completely different. Classical pianists are trained to be perfect, refined, and jazz pianists tend to have more laid back attitude which I love. Both are very different music, and both require tremendous skills.
@Tarik Bey Let's relax. Please dm me or lmk if you wanna add me on facebook/instagram so we can talk about this further. We disagree but we all love music. Thank you very much for sharing with me. I really appreciate your passion about music. I agree, classical snobs are annoying, but so are jazz ones who claim they are the best without knowing anything outside of it. With all respect, i am afraid your knowledge might not based on facts, but based on your own assumption and feeling. I know how hard bebop is, but to say it's the hardest...depends on how you define hard. Bach improvised Fugues by HIMSELF. Then it is obvious that Fugue is the hardest form of all music in that regard. I can bring up any examples like music by Bach, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Bartok, and many improvised music in classical music (yes, improvisation and composing were an inseparable part of being a classical musician. Modern Classical musicians don't realize this and they spend so much time on refinement that they ignored this) and so much more.
How do you define "difficult"? Do more notes mean more difficult? Is music really about making the most complicated, hardest thing possible, or is music about making music that move people? Sometimes the hardest thing to do is to play very simple lines beautifully. My professor and I spent way more time working on a simple passage in Brahms than on a difficult Rachmaninoff Etude. Some of Miles Davis' most touching lines are literally just straight quarter notes and eighth notes. Also, do you wanna provide sources to back up what you say? Where did Horowitz say that thing which you claimed? I have never seen one jazz pianist being able to play the incredible legato and that touching singing sound Horowitz plays. Everyone can play fast and loud. But not everyone can play so beautifully like Horowitz. You say all jazz pianists blow away classical ones, could you prove that? On what standard? How do you define "good piano playing"? (I love the laid back attitude and spontaneousness of jazz pianists, but I can't compliment on their refinement) Almost all I have heard in classical world is classical pianists always look down on jazz pianists for their lack of technique and understanding of classical music. Almost all i have heard in jazz is that "classical pianists cannot improvise". Both are extremely narrow views. I don't agree with them completely tho, but jazz pianists I know, and even the greats, all tend to have less sophisticated technique especially legato technique, but they are much more spontaneous and fun, and they improvise much better than classical pianists (because classical pianists don't focus on improvisation)as I mentioned in my previous comment. My point is also suggesting that one has to be good in classical in order to be good in jazz. Jazz has its own difficulty classical musicians admire, like the ability to make things up on the spot really takes tremendous work, but the pure level of sophistication and refinement and perfection in jazz's improvised music is no where near classical music that are carefully planned, written, and designed like science, based on 400 years of development. Because one is improvised and one is written and planned! Those are two different approaches! Check Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Bach. Classical musicians have to be responsible for everything classical composers do and understand them all and express them with incredible technique. Jazz is much more spontaneous and that's why I love it. I know jazz can get really technical, but I don't think that's the point. The point is the make music. I don't know why you are trying so hard to make the point that "jazz musicians are the best". That's exactly what many many classical musicians say:"classical musicians are the best and classical music is the hardest". Aren't you being a snob yourself? I think both are hard in their own way, and you cannot compare them like that. Both classical pianists and jazz pianists are great in different ways. Also man, if you want further discussion, feel free to dm me. Sorry for sounding rude. I just can't stand it when people say false things. We are all musicians trying to make beautiful music.
@Tarik Bey Also, please don't get me wrong. I really hate to argue because these are all amazing people and arguing who is better and what's harder is silly. They are all unique. We all love music. I absolutely admire Art Tatum and Herbie Hancock to death like I love their playing. Comparing pure classical music in terms of technique and quality they might not surpass what Horowitz and Rachmaninoff and Yujia play, but their musicality touches me greatly, and they play DIFFERENTLY and they are so unique and are just beautiful souls. And they all started classical! That proves how important classical music training is! I think the most successful people today are the ones who can play classical really well and also improvise like a jazz musician. That I call a true musician. Cheers bro.
@Tarik Bey Sorry I wasn’t on UA-cam for the past day. My fam is well! How about yours? It’s a difficult time I hope you are doing well!
Always clear! it just makes me love blues and Jazz way more! it's freedom music! indeed! I love my life! thanks Jonny!
I have music university graduation, i can easily and beautifully play chopin, bach beethoven list, mozart, prokofiev, stravinsky etc, but i cant play jazz. I have absolut hearing and i play bossa nova by just hear once time , and any others musics songs i listen first, but i cant play jazz...For me, jazz lives in another universe..I have too much to travel in ligth velocity years time in music , to reach these unique sounds.
Good to know that im not alone who struggles with jazz pieces
if you get tired of a strict structure , u start to rebel and Explore other dimensions freely. That's how I see Jazz
Some of this is true; most of it is false. The main differences between classical and jazz are rhythm and improvisation.
Classical is concerned with interpreting composed music with balance, precision, and feeling, mostly in strict time except for sections of rubato. The art of great classical performance is extremely difficult to master.
Jazz, on the other hand, requires less precision, but the musician needs to "groove", so to speak. Jazz makes use of almost imperceptible micro rhythms that can't really be notated. Also, you're right about improvisation.
All the other stuff about chords and scales is utter nonsense unless you're talking about beginner students. Just look at the first 10 bars of Rachmaninoff's 2nd piano concerto, or just do a harmonic analysis of any Bach piece.
Don’t think of it as playing “ jazz” , sit at the piano, and try to play the twelve bar blues with out any sheet music, play by ear, make it up , it’s the 1 4 5 , start by playing in C , C=1 F=4 G =5 , the 145 are always major chords in a major key , it goes Major minor minor major major minor diminished If you are in a minor key, it starts on the 6th degree, so it goes minor diminished major minor minor major major, if you can internalize the 12 bar blues, the next step is to try jazz blues , jazz , is the next step, it is all about the 2 5 1, think of the chord Progression as a canvas that you can add your own thing to, study Satin Doll, look at how the 251 works, jazz people don’t see one chord, they look at it as groups of chords functioning together , look at the 251 as a single building block, it took me over 40 years to really understand, internalize, this, make it second nature, another thing , if you want to be a great player , PLAY, think of it as playing, not practicing, not studying, PLAYING !! Have fun! Try to be honest with yourself, do you really want to be a Player, maybe you want to just practice, maybe just study, I never thought I would be able to get past the 12 bar blues, took me 20 years to Really be “ natural “ you will get there it’s worth it I started out at 11 year old ,with lessons, I’m 59 now,still learning, still getting better, and love it more than ever
Yes, this is great advice, thank you!
The leader of the Modern Jazz Quartet was classically trained John Lewis. Perhaps if classical musicians who wanted to migrate listened to MJQ first, it might make the transition easier. Again, the very slow but incredibly beautiful blues piano of Jimmy Yancey, in particular How Long Blues, might be another starting point.
Just watched it again after a year or so. Now it looks way more close, I really understand what’s it’s all about. Thank you, Jonny.
One thing hard in classical strength to play the piece
Also... we classical pianist might not spending time learning our 7th or 6th. We just don't spend time learning you jazz player's progression ... we understand all chords we know 2nd to 7th interval
theory is what you need to learn more
10 reasons jazz pianist struggle to play classical.
1. Their reading is not good enough.
2. They can’t analyze chord progression or key changing from sheet music.
3. They can’t understand what composers really want from complicate parts out of sheet music.
4. Or even by their ears.
5. They can’t memorize exact millions of notes for at least 2 hrs for solo concert.
6. Their left hand is wayyyy too weak for classical pieces. (So much more happens in classical pieces)
7. Their right hand upper fingers (4 or 5{pinky}) are way too weak also. Or can’t produce the differrent weight and mood out of many right hand fingers playing in the same time to make beautiful melody-line.
8. Rubato. What!!!! Rubato oh! No wayy!!! “What is rubato?” jazz player. Yeah!! Try put metronome on jazz recording and classical recording. Which one are more flexi? Hey that’s what jazz people always try to say they r more flexi? Really?
9. Numbers of jazz pianist gave up on classical before turn to jazz. Yeah! Right! Some of them might found that they more interest in jazz music so they turn. But, yep there r still numbers from who gave up from classical. How much who gave up on jazz and turn to classical?
Some of you will argue that cause hell yeah nobody turn to classical cause jazz cool. What ever.
10. Simply they are not skilled enough.
There are so many reasons more like they are not patience enough for sure, polyphony music, rich harmonies, technical.
I’m too offense on this comment I accept it. Cause I pissed off. Stop compare these. Each of them has it’s own beautiful way. And different sets of skill also. Junk video.
Most of this is plain out wrong you say our reading is not good enough yet we are the ones sight reading pieces during symphonies.
We can analyze chord progressions and key changes where do you get that from?
Alexander Scriabin used the Diminished Scale in at least one of his compositions.
The equivalent of a Bebop Scale was used by John Philip Souza.
Its the context in which the scale is used......I hate when people say "jazzy chords"...there is no such thing as jazzy chords.....there are many "jazzy chords" in pop music, that doesnt mean they're playin jazz....scriabin music has some complex harmonies, but we all know it ain't jazz....not by a mile
Dan Ordel Noone says that Scriabin composed jazz music. It was simply stated as a fact that he used many of the scales/harmonies and extended chords in his music before jazz was popular, in response to the video saying the opposite. And not just Scriabin, many classical composers at that time and even before were using them in that context along with other things we don't see in jazz (e.g. polyphony, counterpoint) Even Beethoven introduced boogie-woogie syncopated rhythms 80 years ahead of its time. Check his last piano sonata, 2nd movement if you haven't heard it already. Some amazing stuff happening there.
The overall tone of the video seems to be that classical music is just some old, outdated basic stuff, and jazz is the progressive more enhanced version, something that is completely ignorant. The next step is atonality, it just shows how far the boundaries of tonal music were stretched by the composers of that time (Scriabin, Liszt, Ravel, Debussy, Stravinsky Bussoni and others).
@@pokerbrat302 finally someone who knows
Classical composers were great improvisers, but the problem is in the way classical students today are taught to approach the piano. I have heard of an exceptionally talented pianist (Julliard graduate) who could not even play happy birthday by ear on a request. What's the point of learning music to such a high standard if one cannot even play the simplest tune without reading the dots? I highly value improvisation, playing by ear etc. since these abilities allow me to freely express myself via music, and so I prefer jazz. That doesn't mean classical is bad; I think it is a good starting point for learning jazz.
Is that a real story? I thought they were testing your hearing skills in conservatory. Heck I'm allmost tone dead (never trained my ear) but I can figure out happy birthday by the intervals in my head. I'm a computer science student who plays the piano :))
Jonny, I just discovered your channel. Pacing is perfect, and I'm blown away. Studied some classical in the past as a total amateur, really wanting all the 7th chords and dive into things like Monk and everything. Thanks for your channel. Like Arnold, I'll be back. :)
When I think about classical pianists crossing over into Jazz, I imagine, if they can learn the different way of approaching the music, that they would be pretty adept in the jazz idiom, even dangerous, in a good way. A number of the pianists who are considered masters at Jazz Piano had a foundation in Classical training anyway, in that they were being trained in the classical idiom for years prior to becoming proficient in Jazz. some of the ones I can think of are, Herbie Hancock, Earl Hines, Oscar Peterson, Bill Evans, Elian Elias, Hiromi, Diana Krall, Renee Rosnes, Ramsey Lewis, Teddy Wilson, Brad Mehldau, Lynne Arriale, Michel Petrucciani, Jessica Williams. All these and many more Jazz pianists were first grounded in Classical music either before they ventured into Jazz or were experimenting with Jazz while still being trained in the classical idiom. I suppose these musicians had to make the move from the classical styles they were familiar with to the components of the jazz vocabulary that they were unfamiliar with. I even have a DVD of interviews and music by Oscar Peterson where he recommends that those aspiring to play Jazz should try to get a grounding in classical music to establish a solid understanding of the instrument and a correct understanding of technique, which would only help their development in Jazz.
I am definitely a jazz pianist but i do play everything. I am a working pianist. I am a well rounded pianist. If i need to play classical I will do it but really my forte is Jazz. It is true. With classical you really have to go by the music and slead sheets. With jazz piano is is a bit different. You take a piece of music then you have to improv on it and then come back to it so people know what you are playing. I do play both acoustic and digital pianos. I really do love the jazz sound. Not dogging classicial at all but I feel if I am going to make classicial and I say make because anyone can play music but we make music if we are making classicial music and putting it together then you had better bee on an acoustic grand and not a digital. But at the end of the day classicial pianists and jazz pianists we can all come together and say that we play one of the hardest instruments ever and we can stand together on many things and relate. Lets keep making music together.
In my opinion this two deferent genre of music classical and and jazz. Are both difficult. If you are in pop he he he he any way. I know jazz musician can play classical like chic corea. Even they cant play as much as a classical pianist . But because the knowledge of music theory they can play that but the problem is. jazz musician love in freedom way improvise. So they can play cassical accourding what they hear. So they can fake the piece . Classical pianist is owsome pianist there skill in reading sheet music is high level . They are perfectionist when it comes to perform piece. So thats why they will struggle to play jazz. This two genre is have a defferent dimension so to all musician both classical and jazz. Dont argue regarding this topic. Johnny point is if classical want to learned jazz . Thanks johnny for this video . I learned a lot. Im a lounge pianist and i learned both genre .
@@spencersworldofmusic9686 I totally agree with this comment. Actually in my opinion if you can play more than one style of music Jenna I did spell that wrong by the way if you can play everything or a taste of everything that is good, and it shows people that you are not just sticking to one style…. It is just like languages. If you know more than just English then that will help you out in the long run but if you just know one language then that is going to hendure your speaking abilities with those who don’t know the language. Same with the styles of music. I know many people who just play gospel and that is all they know but if they can branch out and learn other styles sure they will have to work at it but at least they will know when time to play.
How about “10 Reasons why Jazz Pianists struggle to play Classical?” 😂
William Gu 😂😂🤣
Exactly !
Chopin Fredric nah jazz is just better and ur salty
The Rocky mountains look tall, until you see Mt.Everest lol
@@chopinfredric3312 neither is harder or easier, they're just different and require different skills, there are many aspects to jazz that are much harder than classical and vice versa, this is just an idiotic pissing contest.
You definitely still learn scales and appregios for jazz. It’s pretty important. You’re also not composing as you go, the music is composed and there is a written head. You just improvise your solo.
I’m no expert but having played a little classical and a little jazz... the harmony is the same. The music is the same. Just played and presented differently. Jazz is more rhythmic. Syncopation is important as is improv. Classical is more melodic and tempo and rhythm have a different function.
Excellent exposition! And very true.
Big big mistake!you are talking about Easy clasical music! Scales of 7 notes? What!?schoemberg ,bartok ,rachmaninnof! Diferent techinique?nooooooooooo the techinique Is always the same! Totally totally desagree
Fede Primitz that is not the point... studying jazz allows you to have a different feel about harmony.....classical music force you to read pages and pages of someone else. A friend of mine usually plays Chopin as a professional but he is not able to play a simple Beatles song at a friends party! that is ridiculous!
@@robyartic technically he's not a professional
What about cadenza?I just finished my Carrer and wrote a paper about how to improvise a cadenza.
@@robyartic it's not ridiculous, just a completely different skill
I want to see him playing Chopin.
Or Tchaikovsky's no.1
Or playing a cadenza of Beethoven's 5th.
I think one more is lack of "groovy feeling" wich doesnot exist in classical music. I dont agree 100% with #9 because classical also needs listening very much. The reason for most of the problems for classical piano students is that teaching is usually the wrong way (synthetic) with notes, theory and technical stuff first, but not the real music stuff there is in classicals. Most of classical piano students become teachers and the vicious circle continues. (I am a classical pianist - teacher who plays some jazz occasionally)
I call myself a pretty seasoned pianist with only classical training. Every time I try jazz, even the written music, i get the notes easily but putting my right hand and left hand together is a whole different thing. My brain just can't consume those weird beats, and I feel like I am a beginner again. It takes 10 times as much to learn it than to learn some Chopin Etudes. Improvisation is no question!! I admire jazz musicians a lot.
Bill Evans,Keith Jarret,Chic Corea can play classical music and merge them in their jazz playing. I think classical players can do play jazz also because they already have the technique and music theory.
I'm just starting out playing piano, but I quite like to 'improvise' of course if it ever sounds good it's just by chance, but I like to experiment with different rhythms or combinations of notes and often play around like this between more structured practicing.
Which one is better to study then,classical or jazz?
i guess if you put a part the groove and other specific jazz techniques, the two main difficulties i found trying to play jazz after years of classical music, were scales, not because they were different or more complex in jazz, but just because they were not in my DNA , i.e my fingers wouldn't anticipate the next position, the second one being the structure of chords and progression which again are completely different. But a Jazz player would have exactly the opposite problem if he is not coming from a Classical background. You have actually the same problem within classical music itself if you use to play a lot of Beethoven sonatas and move to Rachmaninov, Ravel or Debussy.
There are a lot of people takings everything very personally in these comments :D
He isn't trying to belittle classical or anything... He is just trying to highlight common differences that present themselves in most settings.
On a side note, people need to stop thinking of classical (and jazz) as this mystical, god level music... Any focus on a style will inherently bring out certain skills and make you ignore others.
they can explain what they are doing . before i thought jazzer is playing what they want but when i study it all has change to me cause its important to learned the theory you will explore the meaning of music rather than copying original song in jazz you are free to express your self base on the feelings of what you want to express so it is important to learn the theory then apply it and that it the jazz for me thanks jonny i learn a lot from you
Thanks for video Johnny. Would be great to see how you play some of popular classical compositions. Maybe something from Chopin or Debussy
The old adage of 'once is a mistake; twice is jazz' holds very true :)
This awareness is VERY IMPORTANT! I never realized this being now 54 yo musician (and hating the fact I cannot improvise!!)
In classical, it's all written for the player, so play as it is written. Whereas in Jazz, the song & structure is given. And the player has to digest and understand it well enough to deliver a better rendition of what's given.
Great video! I am a classically trained pianist; I came to your channel to learn more about jazz improv. *new sub*
Rachmaninov said that he understood what Tatum played, but was unable to do the same. And also 'If this man ever decides to play serious music we're all in trouble.'
...
Horowitz sat himself at the piano and began to pay "Tea for Two" for his Jazz counterpart. Thunder and lightening, hail and brimstone, Horowitz finished the piece and looks up immediately at Tatum with an eager set of eyes.
"What do you think?" asks the Russian.
"Very good. I enjoyed it." comes the answer. Pause. Tatum continues: "Would you like to hear my version of 'Tea for Two'?"
"Certainly I would. Go ahead."
Tatum gets up and launches into the piece that has always been one of his specialties. Horowitz' mouth drops when he hears what he hears and as soon as the Jazzman finishes:
"My God! That was fantastic! Where did you get that transcription? You must give it to me!"
"Transcription?" answers Tatum, "That was no transcription. I was just improvising
to divisional . think about where the music finds commonality
This video didn't mention syncopation and swing and I had a hard time understanding what swing was and when I should syncopate when improvising. I think it comes down to the jazz groove being felt but when listening and playing classical music, we don't try to feel any groove in it. Also I think jazz has too many constraints when arranging, I read it needs to have those as well as call and response, having to use the blues scale, and having to include improvisation parts and stuff, a lot of rules to adhere to, and it was difficult to include all these rules in my arrangement, I felt. Though the more I listen to jazz, the less it seems to me that these rules I read are mandatory, but I've yet to hear someone say it. I still enjoy listening though.
Thank you, John. YOUR vids are the most helpful of all. THANK YOU for sharing your gifts.
I've been an church organist ( CAGO) for 35 years. And also play piano in wineries, ctry clubs, casinos, etc.
Organ improv is rarely taught. sitting and "doodling" is not encouraged. Parallel 4 &5, the tritone, aug 2nd are TABOO.
Also, a "classically trained" pianists/organists see 3 separate notes- G B & D# not as an augmented G chord.
Again, MANY THANKS for your vids.
Classical is more mechanically difficult, jazz is more difficult creatively
What course has a tutorial about walking bass
I disagree, Jonny, I think you haven't looked at Ravel... And Chopin.. about scales ...check out messian, satie..as for 251, check out Haydn, any romantic 19th century composer, Doppler(36251), Brahms...
Rootless voicings all over the place. Poulenc uses altered chords. I agree for number 8, takes about 6months to overcome. No 10 is not the message in classical music, interpretation is more important than right notes in classical music. If you listen to different interpreters of any piece they will give quite different renderings. Also I'd like to point out that Bill Evans, Keith Jarrett and a ton of others were classically trained. Thanks for your efforts.
I think Jazz and Classical both take a lot of skill but the difficulty is in different areas. The hardest thing about Jazz for many is effectively improvising over big chords. Meanwhile Classical is largely about precision and complex written passages. It's true that the greats could improvise really well (Bach could even do improv Fugues) but students are taught to play what's on the page. Gershwin is often respected by both Jazz and Classical communities but he's more of an exception (bridging the 2 worlds was a talent of his).
i like both music, is there a classical piece that is jazz souding?
Debussy wrote a few pieces in "cakewalk" style, an early precursor to jazz.
The further you look into 20th century American classical music, the influence of jazz is pretty hard to ignore.
Nearly everything written by Nikolai Kapustin. I recommend starting with concert etudes Op.40 and the first two piano sonatas Op.39 and Op.54. There’s also a prelude and fugue and some other pieces by Gulda or Earl Wild’s etudes on Gershwin songs.
Classical musician never taught to improvise is a wrong thing, Beethoven Bach and Mozart are examples of they can improvise on anything you throw them. you are wrong on that point
I know this is a very smart young man he just didn't really think that there would be experience Musicians I'm Not mad about what he said about a monk
You are absolutely right and from what I've heard that some of the music never was written down at times I don't think you can put everybody in the same category no matter what music they played yet to give him
The benefit of the doubt for trying to help people learn about music lead teacher in the right way of course teach them the right way
It works even today. I have heard stunning classical improvisations on pieces and its not anything special - people just do it.
@Perlas Negras XII When there is so much good and polished repertoire that you can't learn all in 1 lifetime it's understandable why improv is not important.. You cant improvise better than someone who took his time to think and write down a piece. I personally find composition much more interesting than improvisation.
@@TheMelopeus Ironically the compositions you speak of from much long ago was done by many composers who knew how to improvise, and it is possible, even likely, that some of the greatest compositions were inspired by such improvisation.
i’m a classical piano, and i had to learn some jazz for a wedding and i thought i was going to die…
The comments here are more interesting than the video. I would suggest that the only answer is..... good classical pianists don't struggle with Jazz - they neither want nor need to learn it. Jazz needs classical training more than the other way around. There's room for both, of course, but I bet any pro classical pianist could improvise fine if they really tried.
This is why I am more interested to play Jazz although I also love to listen Classical.
For Lennie Tristano improv was different than composition since comp is a mental process and impro it's a subconscious process
What piano/keyboard do you use?
Who said classical pianist never taught to improvise? Traditionally, Baroque music has a lot of improvisations. They're called figured bass (Basso Continuo). It has an interval symbol (number) above or below the notes from bass clef (cello score). The "keyboardist" must improvise, turn the symbol into a good accompaniment, just like a modern jazz. But yeah, the way we improvise are different. Because the colour of Baroque music is different from jazz music, even it's different from classic era.
And in early classic era, pianist have to improvise when they meet fermata. For example when playing concerto, they play cadenza. The cadenzas are supposed to be pianist improvisations. Traditionally, they improvise the cadenza at that time, but some composers wrote down they improvisations. But you can play your own cadenza btw.
The problem is todays teachers only taught they students to read and just read. Only a few teachers taught they students about figured bass in Baroque era or the way how to play cadenza based on the historical performance.
I think if you study "classic" music, you can play everything. You have to consider the entire process, not only a simply c major scale. In" classic" music you study every kind of harmonies and scale...the difference (for me) is the "creativity". Are you a composer? do you like the improvisation? Is the answer is yes the beginning to study jazz not will be to much difficult. Jazz has taken his language from "classic" music too, don't forget it...this is my opinion of course
Yeah you have no clue what you’re talking about
@@davruck1 I don't understand your answer.. I don't think you have to be offensive. Please arguing so we can speak about jazz music and other things
@@ugodipiazza you’re being subconsciously inflammatory and I was pointing that out. There’s this subconsciously racist belief that classical music is superior to other forms of music. There’s this belief that it’s the “standard.” There are people who legitimately believe this.
Great observations!
Thank You Johnny May! Great Jazz teacher! I apply these jazz tips on my improvisation!
Same thing can happen with Jazz pianists trying to play Classical music. Maybe you know Bach, Mozart and Beethoven but do you also know the composers after them? Chopin, Liszt, Rachmaninov, Tchaikovsky, Ravel, and Debussy? Might as well check their musical works.
sorry, you officially lost me the second you said classical piano focuses on precision and not emotion. What makes classical piano difficult is that you require BOTH at an extremely high level to interpret the music on the page.
Also, I'm not sure where you get the idea that classical pianists only learn major scales? Anyone playing classical piano at an intermediate level and higher is expected to play all major and minor scales four octaves, along with their arpeggios, plus chromatic and 3rd/6th interval scales at advanced levels.
Oh, and different technique? You seem to be confusing modern pop piano with CLASSICAL piano in this critique (just look at sheet music for any of the Romantic piano composers to know that's a load of crap). Classical music definitely doesn't flow in one consistent direction like you're implying here. Every classical pianist learns finger independence and dexterity and a jazz musician isn't executing any magical finger technique that's outside a virtuoso pianists skill set.
Ultimately you didn't need 10 ways of saying that jazz pianists improvise off chords and classical pianists don't. You would also come off far less douchy and dismissive of classical piano if you bothered to mention that classical pianists actually read and study music, a pretty useful skill that most jazz musicians don't bother with, and that the actual technical demand for advanced classical music is extremely difficult. In other words, the music is written on a page because it's extremely difficult and requires insane amounts of practice and discipline to master and perform, all things that aren't part of the equation when you improvise on the spot.
All that said, I do love jazz and classical music and I completely agree that they require very different mental approaches when it comes to creativity vs virtuosity. But most of what you're saying in this video is extremely misleading to make it seem like jazz is some higher art form compared to the simplistic nature of elementary classical music (easily noticed when you play a 1st graders classical piano exercise followed by a page worth of full jazz riffs).
Simply put, they're different forms of music that focus on very different musical skills ranging from easy to hard just like any other art form. No need to passively bash one to make yourself feel better about the other.
Well sheet music difficulty depends. To me it's like mathematics. Some people just grasp it easier than others. Something seen to be complex can be simple if you understand its structure.
@@nik8099 If I understood ryro's comment right, he/she was not saying that "reading sheet music is difficult" but rather "most classical music is written down becouse its kind of music is impossible to improvise".
I dont mean you cant imrovise Debussy style stuff wit fancy chord progression and virtuoso stuff, Its definitely possible if you just get used to it. But I mean instead that you simply are not able to make that happen if you want to make long line - complex musical structures in the scale of 5+ minute piece. Amount of imagination needed for it is so big that there have ever been only few muicians in the world who have been able to do it properly.
In other words, sheet music is tool to get music going far beyond limits set by improvisation.
@@nik8099 what he means by sheet music complexity is that some sheets of music are extremly hard technically to perform
good comment, these types of video are super missleading and makes classical pianist look like amateurs
The most different in Classical and Jazz is
Classical is focusing on sightreading and play at sametime with ton of people and different instrument (that's really hard).
Jazz can be freely improvisation compared to Classical that focusing on sharped reading.
each one had advantage.
I'm starting a chanel with a trap at lofi music content and I find most of your videos essential for me. Thank you for all the lessons you are providing.
Baroque period was the most "jazzy" one. There was lot of imporvisation J.S. Bach being one of the most proficient.
Well... if u can play Liszt u can play jazz while sleeping. lol
How do you stop classical musician from playing? Take away their sheet music.
But no, seriously, there are lots of great improvisers in the classical world as well. Especially back in the day; Beethoven used to have improv CONTESTS with his rivals. Furthermore, classical music is almost never fully diatonic. Even Bach and his predecessors used out-of-key notes, like secondary dominants.
Bach is considered the father of modern harmony. He wouldn't be called that if all he wrote was I-IV-V-I progressions like this guy seems to suggest make up all of classical music.
@@dalsegno1251 That's true
@@dalsegno1251
bach did not know what he was playing he was making up as experimenting not the same thing. classical music became dogmalate 18th cemtury. this is what he is referring to.
i agree to you jonny . for me the most highest degree of music is the jazzer cause they have full of theoretical knowledge
30 years ago, I couldn't hear a C+9+5 progression and let alone doing a simple transcription by ear on a jazz tune....it takes lots of listening, imitations and creativity....knowing a bunch of chords, and harmonization will not turn you into a jazz pianist....
How can I learn your walking bass?
In jazz, you have the same chord progression
A 2, 5,1 like he said is a perfect cadence
Jazz and classic have the same root so when you analyse the chord progression of a Chopin piece, or a Beethoven piece, you fine the same rules for chord progression
The difference is in classic, it will be often more worked, and the reason of why we hear difference is : the chords in jazz don't sound like classical chords
@benjy Bachellerie - I disagree with your last statement. The only real difference between classical music and "jazz" is twofold : the blues idiom and the rhythmic treatment / phrasing. In terms of harmony, the difference lies in the harmonization of the blues idiom; everything else (chord structures, voicings, passing chords, quartal harmony, clusters, etc.) can be found in classical music.
@@CrazyYeehah yeah I wrote a bit quick XD
I thought the only difference between jazz and classical was only in the sound, there is this special "jazzy" sound that you instantly recognise as jazz. There are plenty of jazz pieces, which are played from scores and they don't require any improvisation. AND classical musicians used to improvise and apparently were really incredible at it (read biographies of some major composers, especially Mozart and Liszt). I'm a very amateur classical pianist and want to learn to accompany jazz songs (my favourite Julie London songs, most of them). I don't care about improvising, in fact, I don't want to ever do it, and I don't really like listening to jazz musicians "soloing". But I love when a jazz player is able to produce a beautiful accompaniment to a beautiful melody. Or, make a beautiful arrangement. Or play variations on a well-known theme. I'm trying to find some videos explaining jazz theory from the very beginning to those who know zero theory, and then explain how to find chords for a melody and how to play them so it sounds a bit more than basic. I cannot find anything like that on UA-cam.... so frustrating!!
I always thought Jazz in general sounds more uniform in rhythm, tone, and chord choices. Jazz to me sounds like improvising over a set chord progression, and classical is more likely to go somewhere you didn't expect. I love classical/cinematic and jazz is okay to me. I like cinematic jazz.
You earned my subscription with that intro
Also when you play jazz you can hit any wrong note and people will still think it’s correct
Hi Jonny thanks for the very informative video, while some of it can seem obvious, it was presented in a thoughtful way with great musical examples.
Would you be able to recommend a good way to practice the turn technique you mention ?
jtmarinuk Thanks! You can learn more about the turn technique in our jazz improv courses at PianoWithJonny.com 😊 We have a number of courses that cover it in more detail.
Classical focuses on technicality,
Jazz focuses on creativity.
Jonny, you always seem to be enjoying yourself while playing the piano. I wish I could enjoy myself (like you do) and not have to worry about my fingers landing on wrong notes some day!
there are no wrong notes, it’s a variation
The fact that you're demonstrating different jazz techniques but not classical techniques makes me think that you are more of a proponent for jazz than you are classical. I would challenge that you should make the effort to incorporate different music influences so that more diversity can be shown in your playing. I happen to be both a classical and jazz player and enthusiast. Instead of making the point of the struggles of going from playing classical to jazz, why not demonstrate more versatility on how you can do both to broaden your music vocabulary. You would be hard pressed to find UA-cam videos on breaking down classical licks but there's a hundred videos on jazz licks.
Yup. UA-cam has some great Kwik-Jazz channels, but no equivalent for classical. Probably to cater to those who just want to pick up dates. You can learn enough jazz to wow a girl/guy in a couple months - well worth the effort. Not so classical!
Someone needs to make a video titled 10 reasons why Jazz musicians struggle to play Classical. Start with all 48 Preludes and Fugues from Bach's Well Tempered Clavier, Books 1 and 2, make a decent recording of it that's respectable, like Keith Jarrett has done for instance. I have the utmost respect for an artist that has mastered both, but realistically, I think a relative few of us out here have had such a priveleged head start. It never hurts to try, whichever way your heart and passion leads you. I think though to imply that classical musicians don't feel or use emotion when they play is pretty silly. I don't think a classical artist would bother dedicating so many years learning other people's music if they weren't feel anything. Isn't that the point?
Yes completly, classical plates arent just playing major C5 chord without emotions... the 10 point are wrong according me
#7 🤔 Ravel, Debussy... ???
Ahah so true
I compose jazz and classical. Classical is being composed all the time, not just read? Jazz isn’t complicated like jazz musicians like the claim.
you must be john coltrane or smth cos for me playing jazz guitar is a whole mind fuck
Jonny, excellent video. I play classical and jazz GUITAR nevertheless I got a lot of useful insights from you. Very applicable to the guitar. Thanks so much!
Why you don't talk about Debussy's Bartok's and Stravinsky's harmony when talking about progressions?
Thanks for the explanation!! I thought I was the only one struggling.. but I guess the struggle is natural in the beginning!
First off, I appreciate this channel and I've learned a lot about jazz from Jonny. That said, (and this is understandable) Jonny's knowledge about classical music is limited compared to jazz. Firstly, there is improvisation in classical music. Look into performers like Roland Dyens, Gabriela Montero and Wayne Marshall, just to name a few. Virtually any pro organist or continuo player in a baroque ensemble improvises. The difference is in jazz, improvisation is always the format, in classical music it varies, (this is actually the reason I prefer the engineered structures of classical music, because the format can be a lot of different things, with jazz you always know what the format will be, it is going to be soloing all the time). I also want to point out that the professional classical musicians who just interpret works, have virtually all started music before the age of 10. There is essentially zero chance of becoming pro if one starts later than this. In jazz a person can start at almost any age, learn to improvise and even become pro. So technically just interpreting the classical works is more difficult to do. I will agree many classical musicians struggle to play jazz, but not to the extent that jazz musicians struggle to play classical (to a high standard). There are a lot of musicians that can do both. The idea that in classical they only want precision and not emotion is just wrong. As Beethoven said '"to play a wrong note is insignificant; to play without passion is inexcusable." Classical music listeners want emotion too :) Finally your ideas about classical music scales and chords are only applicable to beginners, and you speak as though you are unaware of any classical music past the mid 1800's. But even with earlier classical like Bach his music doesn't even technically use chords, it uses counterpoint and the resulting harmonies are as colorful and complex as anything that occurs in the world of jazz.
How can you say classical musicians doesn’t have emotion? You can not perform Bach or pieces from the romance era if you don’t phrase and add you inner thoughts and emotions to the music. It’s not music if it doesn’t have any emotion. You’re clearly a jazz-musician...
Goddamn hieroglyphics
I love both. But classical music require precise execution in consistant manner, it require musical reasoning/ analysis understanding the piece. You never play the same jazz piece the same ways everytime, as jazz is more like a language you speak how you feel and think at that particular moment.
The problem is both of them hard. Because i learn piano by myself. And i just improvised the shit out of a song. And i like classical techniques because it can make every song seems so beautiful. But jazz is really hard to use in normal pop song. But it still fun to learn
Most great jazz musicians are able to classical, but not a lot of great classical virtuosos are able to play jazz.