• Welcome to the Pipe Organ Forum! This is a part of the open community Magle International Music Forums focused on pipe organs (also known as "church organs"), organists, organ music and related topics.

    This forum is intended to be a friendly place where technically advanced organists and beginners (or even non-organists) can feel comfortable having discussions and asking questions. We learn by reading and asking questions, and it is hoped that the beginners (or non-organists) will feel free to ask even the simplest questions, and that the more advanced organists will patiently answer these questions. On the other hand, we encourage complex, technical discussions of technique, music, organ-building, etc. The opinions and observations of a diverse group of people from around the world should prove to be interesting and stimulating to all of us.

    As pipe organ discussions can sometimes become lively, it should be pointed out that this is an open forum. Statements made here are the opinion of the poster, and not necessarily that of the forum itself, its administrator, or its moderators.

    In order to post a new topic - or reply to existing ones - you may join and become a member by clicking on Register New User. It's completely free and only requires a working email address (in order to confirm your registration - it will never be given away!). We strive to make this a friendly and informative forum for anyone interested in pipe organs and organ music.

    (Note: If you wish to link to and promote your own website please read this thread first.)

    Many kind regards
    smile.gif

    Frederik Magle
    Administrator

    Krummhorn
    Co-Administrator

What defines a good improvisation?

pcnd5584

New member
pcnd5584! Our bit of a musical headbutt did prompt me to go out of my way,
and record an improvisation. I know, I know, it's not a pipe organ, but it is a piano.
All I know is C minor on piano.
I should have warmed up, and I see myself loosening up around the three minute mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wk34FXiSx5g

Ooo! Does this mean it's your turn?

John, if this is the sort of thing which you like, then fine. However, it is worlds away from what we are discussing here.

There was no form, no structure - and little or no textural or dynamic variation. All that you are left with is a wash of noise - mostly with a blues scale (in C) up and down the piano. As you say, it might have been better to have warmed-up first. Another point: there was considerable over-use of the sustaining pedal, leading to a very confused sound in places - and some unpleasant clashes. (It would also be worth getting your piano tuned.)

I do not have any means to record either sound or picture. You could ask David Briggs (if he will bother to reply to you), if he thinks I can improvise. Alternatively, you could ask Dorsetmike (a member here) if he could ever get to the Minster (he knows which one) and he can listen to a live improvisation, perhaps at the conclusion of a Sung Mass or Choral Evensong - although if he is willing to do this, he should let me know first, in order that I do not play printed repertoire on that day.
 

John Watt

Member
pcnd5584! Your interior message got me thinking, and I'm backing off here.
Now that I recognize the discipline of your attitude and professional approach,
I will admit that I am almost very out of place, saying a keyboard as close as I've come to your thread topic.
I held the sustain and soft pedal down all the way all the time, the only effect I had.
This piano was moved here without being tuned, and is by the main entrance.
Playing piano hurts my guitar playing, so my left hand is happy just being boomy bass.
The camera, a gift from a computer store owning sign customer, was too close.
Confusing sound works for me, sometimes emerging from the sustaining mire.

And it's strange, seeing yourself as a video. It's not something I like, stressful to know it's out there.
All the temptations of the world come to me, seeing myself through this global online medium.
Despite my love of Jimi Hendrix and his headphone symphonies, as found on Electric Ladyland,
I've never aspired to record myself, even when friends offered to give me their old recording devices.
You should try it, even as a watchful thing for yourself, definitely a new perspective for your own assessment.

That's one thing I miss out on here, not being in Denmark, or Europe, to see Frederik Magle or members playing live.
If I had slid my finger down from a sharp to the note, I would have been making it bluesy,
but that C minor key is classical for me.
Thank you for approaching this with the dignity you have surely earned, when you could have been very stern.
Acting unmusical, picking up instruments the wrong way to play, works for me, a troubled troubador, sometimes.
As a born-again virgin, I can also be a virtuous virtuoso, the ancestral vestige that I am.
If you can lift my spirits here, I can only imagine how you inspire your congregation.
My parents were founding and charter members of Knox Presbyterian Church.
Even if my mother's mother could come home from a movie and play and sing the songs on piano,
they bought a Hammond organ and hired an organist-choir director.
I grew up singing in the children's choir as lead soprano, same as my mother in the adult choir.
That doesn't justify my input to this thread. I just hope it helps you accept me as a member.

There was a form. Going A flat B flat C with my left hand, and hitting C a lot,
with a C minor chord where I move the bottom C note down a tone at a time, a chord cliche for sure,
is what I expect to do when I sit down. My right hand, and I'm left-handed, does it's own thing.
That's what I reserve piano playing for, not knowing what I'm doing and unable to sing.
 

pcnd5584

New member
... There was a form. Going A flat B flat C with my left hand, and hitting C a lot,
with a C minor chord where I move the bottom C note down a tone at a time, a chord cliche for sure,
is what I expect to do when I sit down. My right hand, and I'm left-handed, does it's own thing.
That's what I reserve piano playing for, not knowing what I'm doing and unable to sing.

Just to pick up on one point. No - this is not what I meant by 'form' - as in the sense of arabesque, berceuse, binary, canon, fugue, march, minuet, partita, passacaglia, pavane, rondo, ricercare, scherzo, sonata, suite, ternary, theme and variations, toccata, trio, etc. What you are describing is simply a [chord] sequence.

With regard to your membership - I have no problem with this (In any case, it would not be my decision.). However, I would state that I am a member of three other boards (on one of which I serve as both a moderator and administrator) and I would suggest that there is much which may be learned from some other members - simply by reading their posts. Of course, occasionally, some statements will require further checking or verification from reliable sources.

Whist I take your point that you are not easily able to get to hear other performers live, you are (as far as I can guess) only about 130km from Toronto. David Briggs (world-class concert organist and improvisor) is currently Artislt in Residence at Saint James' Cathedral, Toronto. Why not contact them and see when he is next due to play there. To hear (and watch) him improvise is a revelation.

If you cannot do this, then you might at least try the following links (one of which I have posted before):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOQvxK813J0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaKVueGVfQE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYl2s0C7BCs (his improvisation commences at 0':52")
 
Last edited:

John Watt

Member
A little admonishment, that's what I feel.
Yes, my preconceived use of a few notes, no, my dependence on very few familiar left hand notes,
isn't a form you would recognize, and I shouldn't have used your word.
I'm not familiar with seventeen of the twenty forms you mentioned,
but if scherzo is close to schitzo I'm almost there.

Thank you for telling me about David Briggs. A friend had one of his albums in high school.
Not to aggravate you, and this might, but I liked "Switched on Bach", synthesizer versions,
and "The Four Seasons", a double album, synthesizer use, by, uh, Walter to Wendy Carlos,
someone who got synthesized himself-herself. I can only revere all life on earth.
I bought those two albums for myself, and I didn't buy a lot of albums, going through guitar strings and batteries.
Thinking about them now I can see why I gravitated to them,
because the synthesizers allowed more tone and loud volume, a direct injection of electronic signal,
than microphones were capable of, considering the Piezo Pickup came out after that.

You're right about Toronto, I lived there three times playing in bands and haven't been there for over twenty years.
I miss sitting outside listening to a Royal Conservatory busker playing away on a beautiful instrument.
I miss my Ottawa Symphony and Ottawa Symphony Orchestra bassoon playing girlfriend even more.
She's the only musician I've ever wanted to visit just to watch her practice.
I was sponsored in a residence by Professor John McCallum, Electronics, at York University.
It was nice living in an almost dust-free environment, electronically.

I'm not able to attend services as a meditative participant in St. James Cathedral in Toronto,
and I don't want to take advantage of a congregation just to listen to the music.
I don't want to be seen as being reduced to quibbling, considering my now acknowledged off-topicness,
but let me describe my travels across Canada, okay, specifically Ontario, in terms of a cathedral.

As far as I know, the only cathedral outside of Quebec is in Guelph, and I've walked past St. James in Toronto.
What qualifies the Guelph church as a cathedral, just what they say, is the section behind a wall behind the pulpit.
It's a walkway the width of the building with life-sized scenes on both sides, re-enacting stories from the Holy Bible.
Of course there's a pipe organ there, with talk of flying buttresses, so small I wouldn't call them that.
I played in Guelph in a couple of different bands, and always visited on a weekday to see,
thinking the figures and scenes looked better than Madame Tousaud's Museum in Niagara Falls.
I've always only thought of it as the cathedral in Guelph, not knowing the name for you.

Congratulations on being a moderator. I aspire to such a fontitude of musical responsiblity,
even if I'm sure that my concept, and ability, of moderating is different from yours.
Something tells me it would involve a form you recognize, a lot of waltzing around.
That would be an interactive upgrade from being a local music columnist and featured article music reporter,
a old job I miss. Having a press pass, getting into shows backstage from Buffalo to Toronto, nice!
But just like every other success that isn't approved by the criminals that run this city,
it didn't last very long. Getting investigative in my home town, a Bob Woodward influence, was very bad.
Hearing two sets and talking with McCoy Tyner in 1976-77? for twenty minutes, during a break,
was the best, and no-one in his band, touring behind "Atlantis", played electric guitar.
Thanks for the three links.
 
Last edited:

kas

New member
This is certainly an interesting thread. I make great use of improvisation at every service I play. Sometimes I will preconceive of a musical motif, general theme, or a harmonic pattern before I start, but I find that some of my best improvisations are those where I have absolutely no idea where I'm going until I go there. I truly believe the Holy Spirit works through us and inspires us to create music that we might otherwise, outside of the liturgical setting, not be able to duplicate. I find this happens all the time. Much of my improvisation centers around extemporizing on the offertory hymn prior to the choir actually singing it, and then again when the choir finishes and before the priest is ready to go on with the next part of the Mass. The same is true for purifying the vessels following Communion. I will often get done with wherever the improvisation has taken me and wonder to myself -where in the world did all that come from? I will wind up modulating into different keys totally unplanned, will sometimes return to the original key and sometimes not. Again, I attribute it to the Holy Spirit at work. I think there is possibly a distinction also between improvisation and pre-conceived composition that takes place on the spot. To some extent I suppose these two cross paths, and yet I think there is a difference. I think what needs to be defined, if possible, is what degree of absolute spontaneity is present in what music is being created, and what part does "composing" on the fly play in how we improvise. Interesting stuff. Also, what plays a role in how we improvise is our past training and musical experience. My first training was on guitar, and so my guitar work certainly influences what sort of music comes out when I sit at either the organ or piano. Also, what music we have listened to that has helped to shape us plays another role. I was very influenced by the early Windham Hill instrumentalists (New Age music for those not familiar). The style of New Age is, of course, rather free and improvisatory, and so that has had an impact on me as well. I do not specifically think in terms of...now I'm going to improvise a piece in a classical style or in any particular form. I just let whatever musical energy is present dictate what flows through my fingers and feet. Certainly everything must be kept within the confines of what is appropriate in a church setting. What is interesting is that sometimes the musically disciplined part of me almost experiences moments of panic by what it is hearing. It's a feeling of....just where AM I going with this? But to dwell on that invites the whole freedom of the improvisational spirit to come crashing down like a house of cards. Tough subject to really define and explain. It's undoubtedly different for all of us. But I do think that in the church setting there is divine inspiration that touches us and brings the music forth.

At any rate, those of us who can improvise (not all organists can) should feel blessed that we have this ability. It is not only very enjoyable and musically rewarding, but sure comes in handy for all those times when we need to just fill in for a few moments.
 
Last edited:

pcnd5584

New member
Speaking personally, I would be extremely reluctant glibly (and arguably presumptuously) to ascribe Divine intervention to my improvisations (or, for that matter, to those of another musician).

It sounds more as if you are simply rambling around hymn (or song) tunes.

Whilst there are certainly times in which I have been aware that one of my improvisations has been particularly inspired, I would strongly suggest that, instead of relying on this as a general rule, a good improvisation needs a clear structure (and key-centre), a strong and fluent technique, a good knowledge of musical forms (and not simply meandering around a hymn tune) and - without question - the ability to think and plan in advance of what one's fingers are doing.

I have heard a number of organists improvise, in which the order of the latter is reversed. In each case, the result was unsatisfactory, unconvincing - and simply sounded like someone wandering around a keyboard; any 'good' sounds or phrases being the result of good fortune.

I do not regard this as good improvising. Neither, so I understand from his biographers, did Johann Sebastian Bach.
 
Last edited:

kas

New member
Dear pcnd,

Excuse me, but I must be honest in that I find your reply to appear to have a condescending feel to it. You have no idea what my improvisational or musical abilities are, and yet presume to make a judgment that what I do is not only musically unworthy based on your interpretation of what constitutes improvisation, but hidden between your lines there is also an implication that my musical creations are inevitably inferior to anything you might create. At least that is the impression I'm getting. I have been complimented more times than I can recall as to my musical improvisations, as I'm sure you have been in your church. As to divine inspiration, no presumptuousness on my part was intended. I merely am stating that it feels that way to me. If the presence of the Holy Spirit is not felt in what we as music ministers do, then I think there is indeed something lacking in how we approach the liturgy and our own instrumental offerings and perhaps we are not being open to the Holy Spirit working through us. I am truly disappointed, a bit annoyed, and even saddened that you would refer to my playing as "simply rambling and meandering around hymn tunes". What can you possibly base this statement on? You seem to be operating from the premise that there is only one way to approach improvisation, and anything that deviates from this preconception must result in something that is musically unsatisfactory. I believe I probably take a freer, possibly more spontaneous approach to improv than you do. And, quite frankly, I don't really give a rat's behind what Bach's thoughts were on improvising. For one thing, we're talking about a musical genius who was able to create a 4 (or more) part fugue on the spot, completely consistent with the musical idioms of the time. Undoubtedly noone on this forum is even worthy to carry the guy's organ shoes. A fully fleshed-out Bach musical creation is not the type of improvisation that I'm referring to. As I said in my other post, I create music to expand on the offertory and post-communion time, and also between my final prelude and the processional hymn as time allows. As I also mentioned, much of what I do has been influenced by the modern, new age style. I don't make any special attempt to ground my improvisations in a Baroque or any other style. I let my heart be my guide. I'm more concerned with expressing emotion and feeling in the music than adhering to format. If this constitutes some ineptitude in your book, so be it.

I read in one of your posts that you are a teacher. I taught public school music for 33 years and one of the abiding principles by which any good music educator should live is that we should offer constructive advice and / or positive comments to each other, or at the very least not display preconceived notions of others' abilities if we have not even worked with them or heard them play. I would submit that this approach should extend not only within the teacher / student relationship, but also among peers. Are we not all working towards the same end, that of praising God through our music? That being said, should we not try to do what we can to uplift and support each others' efforts? Rather than being open and constructive, your reply would appear to contain elements that could certainly be construed as being self-aggrandizing. I truly hope I'm wrong, as I have no doubt that you are a fine musician. I would hope you would be open to the possibility that I am as well. Certainly I hope you agree that a bit of humility in how we approach and relate to other is always desirable, and is indeed the way that God wants us to be. Thank you for your reply and thoughts.

Grace and Peace,
KAS
 
Last edited:

wljmrbill

Member
Personally I have always felt that there are those musicians that are divinely inspired/gifted and those are from a learned form on musicianship. I have felt that Bach was perhaps both as well as Handel. But then again I am a Episcopalian in life and philosophy and that may enter into my observations too.IMHO
 
Last edited:

pcnd5584

New member
Dear pcnd,

Excuse me, but I must be honest in that I find your reply to appear to have a condescending feel to it. You have no idea what my improvisational or musical abilities are, and yet presume to make a judgment that what I do is not only musically unworthy based on your interpretation of what constitutes improvisation, but hidden between your lines there is also an implication that my musical creations are inevitably inferior to anything you might create. ...
KAS

Dear Kas,

In your post you wrote the following: 'Sometimes I will preconceive of a musical motif, general theme, or a harmonic pattern before I start, but I find that some of my best improvisations are those where I have absolutely no idea where I'm going until I go there. I truly believe the Holy Spirit works through us and inspires us to create music that we might otherwise, outside of the liturgical setting, not be able to duplicate. I find this happens all the time. Much of my improvisation centers around extemporizing on the offertory hymn prior to the choir actually singing it, and then again when the choir finishes and before the priest is ready to go on with the next part of the Mass. The same is true for purifying the vessels following Communion. I will often get done with wherever the improvisation has taken me and wonder to myself -where in the world did all that come from? I will wind up modulating into different keys totally unplanned, will sometimes return to the original key and sometimes not. ...'

I have worked and studied hard for years - not just with regard to improvisation, but in many fields of musical knowledge. What you write above goes against everything which I have been taught - and this includes the teachings of David Briggs.

As I was taught, and as I teach my own pupils - if you do not know where you are going or what you are doing, if you have no clear plan for form and key-structure, then this is not improvising - it is simply undisciplined background music - particularly if the player has no clear idea of form or overall structure. I occasionally ask my pupils 'Would you pay to hear someone else play this piece - or purchase a copy, were it to be transcribed?' If they cannot answer those questions with any certainty, then it would be better to play a piece of printed music.

Whose improvisations are better is rather missing the point. Simply to sit back and let your hands wander round the keys, as if in a trance, is no substitute for careful study, a wide knowledge base and a good technique. I am sorry, but I regard this perceived deliberate intellectual detachment as laziness. Again, I am somewhat concerned by your imputation that the Holy Spirit just 'takes over', as it were, when you play. This is what I find presumptuous - and it bothers my own understanding of this aspect of the Christian faith.

Furthermore, I get the strong impression that it is actually you who is implying that your improvisations must be better - purely because the Spirit apparently plays through you. This too worries me. It implies that this is the only way to improvise - and that there is no need for study, or to gain knowledge, just sit back, and let the Spirit do the work.

Again, this goes against everything which I believe and have been taught. With regard to whether you think that I am implying that my own improvisations are better than others - here, neither do you know me, or anything about me. Would that I had half the talent of a Cochereau or a Briggs - I would be content. Personally I have very high standards and levels of self-criticism; I am almost never satisfied with anything I do - always feeling that it could be better. However, I also expect others to maintain equally high standards - particularly those of us who are in a position to lead and, it is to be hoped, genuinely to enhance the worship in our churches and to inspire others with a vision of the greatness of God.

Whether or not you have been complimented many times is also neither here nor there - surely we do not look merely for man's approval - we offer back our gift(s) to Almighty God - and do the best of which we are capable. Therefore, I regard it as my sacred responsibility to learn as much as I can from those who are more knowledgeable than I, to study as much as I can, in order to give me the widest terms of reference possible and to play to the best of my ability.

Anything less, I should not dare to offer to God.
 
Last edited:

kas

New member
Hi Wljmrbill,

I tend to agree with your thoughts. The ability to improvise, alone, could be construed as a form of giftedness. I know of some organists that simply feel they do not possess the ability to play anything that is not on manuscript in front of them. Much depends, obviously, on one's musical background and training. And yet there are things that simply cannot be taught. There is either an innate ability, to some extent, or there isn't.

Best,
kas
 

kas

New member
Pcnd,

Thanks again for your reply. I may have greatly overstated the whole 'divine inspiration' thing. It is certainly not like I sit back in a trance, utter 'venite spiritus' to myself, and then go on auto-pilot. I will say this though - that oftentimes when I'm done with an improv, there is no way I could reproduce most of it again even if asked to. I do consider a melodic and harmonic pattern before I start in many instances - probably a few measures or so - and then go from there. What I failed to mention is that perfect pitch allows me to 'hear' what is going to come out before I start. So I begin to conceive of a chordal progression and melody or descant or whatever - I hear it before I play - and then begin. So how much of this process is taking place as I go along is undeterminable. Plus, your analysis of my music being hit or miss as to whether or not anything good comes out "by fortune" is thus somewhat erroneous. I don't need to play a written piece of music to hear it and know if it is to my liking and of musical quality. I can scan it and hear it (unless of course the harmonic structures are too atonal or chromatic in nature). So it's not like I'm haphazardly throwing my hands at the keys with a pot luck approach. Many musical ideas come into my mind whenever I am playing, unless of course I am strictly reading something. It may well be that, during improv, my musical thought and cognition process is quickly 'scanning' or hearing these ideas before they are actually set forth. How am I to know. So "improvisation", per se, to some degree, is part of my playing in everything I do - during hymns, service music, whatever. I doubt if I ever play any one service the same way twice. It's always different. I think we're coming from very different backgrounds. It sounds like you have formally studied organ for years. I have not. I am largely self-taught, having really only had a few semesters of formal training as a minor in my undergrad work. I was a clarinet major in college, and am also, as I mentioned, a guitarist with many years of training. I consider myself a musician first and foremost, who produces music using the guitar, for example, rather than just calling myself a guitarist. Same is true for the clarinet and organ. Needless to say, you still obviously need the technical abilities to play the music that you want to. There is certainly literature out there for the organ that I would not begin to tackle. So in that regard you may well be a more proficient technical organist than myself. So for you to understand my approach to improv and for me to understand yours is probably almost like a language barrier. Enough said I think. Also, consider that my many years of playing in bands and solo work with guitar doing a wide variety of music has been very influential as well and so probably plays a part in how I improvise. Moreso than structure and form, my improv probably carries many different stylistic elements to it - jazz, folk, blues, etc. But as I mentioned initially anything I do in church is tempered and done in a way that is still appropriate for the liturgical setting. I thank you for your thoughts. You sound very committed to expanding your knowledge of playing the organ, which is commendable. We as musicians always need to be seeking growth. "If you rest, you rust"! At any rate, with this post I end my contribution to this thread. I think you and I will simply have to agree to disagree on the general subject of organ improv, although this certainly has been one of the more interesting threads I've encountered here. Best of luck to you in all that you do.


kas
 
Last edited:

pcnd5584

New member
Kas,

A few thoughts - not to prolong this discussion, but in order to correct a few misapprehensions:

In the first instance, it was you who wrote: '...where I have absolutely no idea where I'm going until I go there' ... so in fact my assessment of your improvisation being 'hit or miss', as you put it, appears to me to be entirely apposite.

Secondly, it is clear that you have not read my last post carefully. I did not state anything to the effect of '[you] don't need to play a written piece of music to hear it and know if it is to my liking and of musical quality.' In fact, I was referring to my pupils and stated clearly that I ask them to assess whether their improvisations are of an acceptable standard. To encourage this, I ask them to consider whether they would pay to hear someone else perform the improvisation in question, or purchase it, if it were to be transcribed. If they could not answer this with a firm 'yes', then I would suggest that they would be better off playing something which someone else has already composed. This is entirely different from the meaning you have assumed. (With regard to the epithet 'rambling', I again based this on conclusions drawn from statements which you have made. If you wish for further clarification, I am happy to list them and explain how I came to those conclusions.)

Looking again at your two previous posts, I am not even sure that you read your own posts carefully. In post Nr. 47 you wrote '...you would refer to my playing as "simply rambling and meandering around hymn tunes". What can you possibly base this statement on?' In fact, I based my comment on your statement: 'Much of my improvisation centers around extemporizing on the offertory hymn prior to the choir actually singing it, and then again when the choir finishes and before the priest is ready to go on with the next part of the Mass. The same is true for purifying the vessels following Communion.' Again, my conclusion appears to me to be perfectly reasonable in the light of your previous statement.

For the record, I also have a good sense of pitch. (I prefer the terms 'relative pitch', or 'remembered pitch'. 'Perfect pitch' could be taken to imply some hereditary 'gift', with which one was born. Since concert pitch - in the UK, at any rate - was changed at least three times during the twentieth century, this argues against the latter definition being possible. Rather, I believe that one can be born with an ability, even as a small child, to remember the pitch of notes and keys. In fact, one could attend several concerts at the South Bank Centre, London, during the course of the year, and hear a great variety of differently pitched instruments and ensembles - particularly those performing Early music. This would tend to drive anyone with a good sense of pitch to distraction.)

The fact that you cannot usually remember anything which you have just improvised would be viewed by our colleges and teaching institutions here as something to be addressed, rather than encouraged. In addition, the fact that you are largely self-taught, is also illuminating: 'So for you to understand my approach to improv and for me to understand yours is probably almost like a language barrier.' Not as far as I am concerned. I think I have gained a fairly good idea of how you approach the subject of improvisation, from your descriptions.

Kas, if you seek fresh inspiration you could do a lot worse than to listen to one or two of the improvisations of Gerre Hancock. He was for many years director of music at Saint Thomas' Church, Fifth Avenue, NYC. Here are a few links:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKQMR-u2wAE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9M82-Rlc5g (The improvisation follows the hymn at about 3':34".)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_K53nQtZec
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsuXVzG3OuI (The improvisation follows the hymn at about 4':43!.) This latter improvisation was recorded on Gerre Hancock's final Sunday, prior to his retirement from Saint Thomas' Church.


As you write, we are each viewing this subject from very different backgrounds. If you are content to do what you do, the way that you are currently doing it, then that is up to you.

Whilst I wish you well in your endeavours, for my own part, I prefer not to rely upon luck - rather I advocate hard work, thorough knowledge and careful preparation.
 
Last edited:

pcnd5584

New member
...And yet there are things that simply cannot be taught. There is either an innate ability, to some extent, or there isn't.

This statement needs qualification.

It is true that if someone has no innate ability in the field of improvisation it is very difficult to teach them to produce anything worthy of merit - even to a small extent. However, if someone does have a natural aptitude for it - then there is a great deal which can be done by a good and experienced teacher, in order to help the student become a really proficient improvisor.

Speaking as a teacher (also of many years' experience), my observation is that there is only so much that one can achieve by being self-taught. I have yet to meet a self-taught musician (in any instrumental discipline) who had mastered their instrument to a similar level of expertise as someone who had studied under a good teacher. I state this as an observation of fact - not in order to belittle anyone's achievements.
 
Last edited:

John Watt

Member
Fabulous fabulous posts to read here, but I'd like to add something the as-yet-untitled Frederik Magle said.
I asked about his improvisations, trying to equate them with my use of sounds my equipment makes,
an electric guitar with an amplifier and effects that generates feedback with stereo panning washes of sound.
He surprised me, saying that some of what he played sounded out after his use of keys and stops,
having to pre-time parts to make it all come together, even commenting on the mechanical sound of the organ.
It's not as easy as I thought.

I had a book that described how great composers, artists and inventors came up with their creations.
They all said they saw it in a dream, a voice in the dark told them, or a heavenly being visited them.
All praise for Jubal, our first musical host.
 
Last edited:
Top