I'm thinking about doing the grade 5 alto sax jazz exam this summer. The assessment criteria talks about the importance of a "performance", in which case, I don't feel that a CD backing track would be quite the right thing.

What are the pros and cons of CD versus live backing? If I use a live musician or 2, must one of them be a pianist, or could I use a guitarist? How closely must the backing musian follow the music on the CD? For example, would they need to play the same intro that the piano on the CD does?

Thanks for your advice

Girl

Well done for wanting to play it "live". While I think CD backings are wonderful tools for practising, one of the reservations I have about the jazz exams, is that I think one of the key skills you must learn as a jazz musician is communication - being able to listen to and respond to the people you're playing with and the exams in their current format don't really address this at all.

I'm afraid I don't really know anything about how the exams are conducted, so can't help you with that.

My son took a Guildhall jazz sax exam a couple of years ago and had the option of using a CD, but we managed to find a pianist who was experienced at jazz. If you can possibly find one I think this is the best option, as a 'classical only' pianist wouldn't be able to play the accompaniment with the right feel, unfortunately. If you go to your local music shop they should keep details of local piano teachers - there must be at least one jazzer amongst them who could accompany if youasked them nicely, paid a decent price and gave them enough notice.

Violinia

I wouldn't worry about this 'classical only' pianist nonsense (sorry Violinia), but I think you'll find alot of accompanists are o.k. with playing jazz.

Just check with the pianist you ask, and they'll let you know.

I am a classically trained pianist and have recently been studying jazz. I found the transition to jazz really easy, probably because I have been involved with all types of music all my life.

Good luck!

You may have found the transition to jazz easy, clair de, because you've been involved with all types of music all your life, but there's an awful lot of accompanists out there who have only ever played classical music and would struggle to play a jazz accompaniment with the right groove or feel. A sensible examiner would turn a blind eye to an accompanist's lack of instinctive feel - after all, it's the soloist they're judging, not the accompanist, but a jazz-immersed accompanist could only enhance the soloist's performance whereas a classically-trained pianist with no feel for jazz could be a hinderance.

I can think of a number of accompanists in my home town who would struggle to play a jazz accompaniment convincingly, and I certainly wouldn't ask any of them if I wanted another accompanist for my son - I'd go to one of the guys who can play well by ear and has a good feel for jazz. Sorry but there's a big difference.

As for finding the transition to jazz easy - it's a well-known fact that classically trained musicians often find the transition to jazz a long and uphill struggle. I may be waxing dogmatic here but I get a bit irritated when people make light of the difficulties involved in switching convincingly from one music genre to another. You wouldn't expect a life-long jazzer to perform a convincing rendition of a classical piece unless they were extremely well-versed in the genre and I don't see why it should be any different the other way round.

Violinia

If you're a pianist - there are some serious disadvantages to using a live accompanist...!

But if not - live is ALWAYS better!

Sorry, but it has just come naturally.

I suppose I must have broken the mould and sorry if you find it irritating, but I can't help it.

I love jazz and really haven't found it a problem.

As you say, perhaps it is because I have been exposed to a wide and varied repertoire of music all my life, but then I thought most musicians were.

Why the need to be so rude, as in: when I just commented to the person needing a jazz accompanist that they'd be better off with someone with jazz experience?

It's not your 'breaking of the mould' I find irritating in this thread - it's your gratuitous rudeness. As it happens I'm a professional working jazz musician, and was once looking for the right accompanist for my son when he was taking his Grade 5 jazz sax exam, so I think I know what I'm talking about. For one of the pieces the accompanist had to comp over a minor chord progression and a classical pianist with no previous jazz experience would have been totally at sea.

And no, not all musicians have been exposed to a wide and varied repertoire all their lives - plenty specialise and have very little knowledge of other genres. That's up to them and is their prerogative in my view, unless they teach school music. (For the record, the Head of Music in one of the schools I teach in had never come across the Dorian mode and thought one of the pieces of music I was teaching had the wrong key signature because it appeared to be in D minor yet had no sharps or flats. I don't think he's a rarity.)

As for 'not finding it (jazz) a problem', I'm sorry but I don't think you can really say this with genuine authority until you've got up in front of a few seasoned jazz audiences and performed well-received solos. My apologies if you have already done this.

Violinia

A music teacher who hasn't heard of the Dorian mode? That's not really on, is it?

After all - modes are not confined to jazz music... And I would expect a music teacher to have a grounding of general knowledge to cover all genres of music...



And with regards "classical only" pianists... All styles of music are easy to pick up to a musically-able person... If your "classical-only" pianist has any ear for music, he/she should be able to play the accompt. decently after a few attempts...

This guy isn't only a music teacher - he's the Head of Music in a large secondary school!

Re all styles of music being easy to pick up to a musically able person - sorry but I have to disagree - jazz isn't 'easy' - not if you want to do it right anyway. The accompaniment I'm talking about was a groove in a certain key over specified chord changes. I just don't think most classically trained pianists would be able to do this with ease if they had never played without dots or attempted jazz before.

OK! The phone just rang and it was a pianist/accompanist friend of mine (who also plays in a tango band for the record). I asked her if she'd be able to do the above and she said no, and she doubted most classically trained pianists would be happy to do it without some jazz training.

So it's not just me who thinks this.

Violinia

Totally agree Manek.

I was very worried when I read that!
Totally agree with what you've said about being able to pick up musical styles. Different styles are not just for the reserve of those already playing them.

Thanks for the support as I really am enjoying jazz and am finding it very interesting. I'm hoping to start taking Grades soon.

I've always done a bit of jazz impro by ear ( nothing serious), and covered it in a basic way in my music degree (obviously). Now seems the right time to take it further.

I was inspired by JoyJoy who took up jazz last year (or was it the year before). I read her threads on how she was doing and she gave me advice on what books to get (which I am now studying). I love her new signature which says Grade 5 Jazz!!

So, I won't be put off, just because I was classically trained, in the same way I would never dream of putting off a jazzer who wants to have a go at the classical repertoire.

BTW I won't accept your apologies Violinia. There is only one person who has been rude here. Just because I dared to disagree with what you said ( that's why I put 'sorry Violinia' in brackets). I have to say I can't believe you could be so dismissive of people wanting to learn a new skill. Teaching is all about encouragement and support!

Yeah - I've never been "taught" jazz... But took Grade One jazz last term, and passed with 142!

Wow! Well done !

Who's trying to put you off? Not me. My point in this thread from the start was that I thought it best for the Grade 5 jazz candidate to look for an accompanist with experience of jazz. My accompanist friend who happened to call me this afternoon said she would certainly balk at accompanying in a jazz exam (as she's had no jazz training) and I doubt she'd be alone in that.

You may have said 'sorry Violinia' but not before you'd said 'I wouldn't worry about this 'classical only' pianist nonsense'. It wasn't nonsense at all and I still think it was rude of you to say it.

Acknowledging that learning to play jazz well isn't easy is no way meant to be discouraging - it's just realistic. But as someone who is lucky enough to be in the position of teaching jazz violin, both in workshop situations and with individuals and also in both primary and secondary schools, I give as much encouragement as I am humanly able to be and am always thrilled when a student leaves the printed page and starts to improvise.

As for being dismissive, where? How? I'd be the last person to dismiss anyone's journey into jazz - perish the thought - I just balk when people make glib comments about it being easy. Even the very greatest jazz musicians don't say that, and they should know.

Violinia

I would have thought that a "classically trained" accompanist would actually relish the thought of getting their fingers and head around something in the Jazz genre, particularly at grade 5 standard - ideal opportunity for a good accompanist to broaden their experience.

(And I speak from experience having accompanied a Grade 7 recorder piece which was titled as a "written-out Venezuelan Jazz improvisation". Having never attempted anything of the sort before, I practised it carefully with the soloist...and WE got rave reviews from the examiner. I guess it depends on how good the accompanist is and/or how willing they are to work at a piece.)

.

Jazz is easy if you are classicaly trained. Even easier if you have had Jazz training

I take it we're talking about an accompaniment that's scored, and not one that the accompanist is expected to improvise? That's the only way I can really envisage a classical pianist having problems - I certainly would, but I don't think I'd worry about something that was written in front of me, given a bit of practice!

You can download written out accompaniments for about 60% of the tunes on the grade 5 ABRSM sax syllabus. To be honest, if your accompanist is going to play strictly what's written you might as well use the CD backing. The big advantage of a live accompanist is that you have the opportunity to develop a dialogue, although in an exam situation obviously the horn would need to take the lead, the benefit of a good accompanist in sparking off and building a solo is immeasurable. That just won't happen if the accompanist is reading the dots.

I did think of adding something re the jazz v classical debate but decided against it - I'm in awe of musicians in both camps who manage to make their living out of it. I'm lucky enough to know astonishingly good classical and jazz sax players, without exception they all have a huge amount of respect for each other's skills. There's no "better" or "easier", just different.

Yeah, can't wait 'till I can start improvising by 'feel'. Still, very early days for me and looking forward to it.

Well said BTW about respecting each other's skills.

There isn't a debate as such going on though. It's just really that Violinia implied it would be a long uphill struggle for me to learn jazz just because I am Classically trained.

It took me quite a few years to become the pianist I am at the moment. Alot of hard work and dedication. I am under no illusions that I will have to put in time and effort to learn jazz techniques. However, I don't think it will be the struggle that she implies. Neither do some jazz pianist friends of mine. They are very easy going and love the way I am understanding the rhythms and beginning to just 'take it away'.
It is fun.

That is what the forum is all about. Giving support, encouragement when needed and good advise, that's all.

I never said or even implied 'long uphill struggle' - I actually used the words 'not easy' because I thought your calling it 'easy' was misrepresentative, and slightly insulting to the great jazz musicians, none of whom would call it 'easy'. Exciting, fun, revealing, creatively challenging and ultimately satisfying, yes...

As for classical accompanists relishing the idea of trying out jazz accompanying in an exam for the first time - most of the accompanists around where I live are classical specialists as well as incredibly busy and stretched and it's as much as they can do to fit in one rehearsal with the student before the exam. This is why I said to the original poster: look for an accompanist with experience of playing jazz. I really didn't mean anything more by it than that.

Finally, I found this on the Stanford website:



My sentiments entirely - and nowhere does it say learning jazz is 'easy'! Fun, joyful, delightful, challenging, demanding... and what's so wrong with that?

Violinia

Re read my above words! How could the above quote be read as :'learning jazz is easy'.

Anyway, it's all getting a bit silly, so I think we should drop it.

At the very beginning you said you 'found the transition to jazz easy', that you ' really haven't found it a problem', which sounded a bit too glib to me, that really was all. Plus calling what I'd said to the original poster 'nonsense' - which was pretty rude and bound to get anyone's back up.

Anyway, I agreee - it's time to drop it.

Violinia

Gosh. How mature Clair de.

I've was reading this thread with interest.
Have to say, I feel quite motivated with what Clair de is saying about finding jazz quite accessible.

I didn't read her post though as accusing your post of being nonsense, though Vilina. I just thought Clair de was a bit miffed that you were implying it is for the reserve of Jazz pianists only, and if you play Classical then you'll never understand jazz.

But then again, I don't know much about jazz yet, only Martha meir e.t.c. which is all notated. So I understand the rhythmic structure but not the improvisation part of it.

I think the best advice seems to be from both of you. Ask around to find a good jazz accompanist, and also ask the pianist involved what they have done previously.

BTW, I know someone who plays Classical and Jazz and accompanies both!

Sorry to add yet another note of dissent in to what is a good discussion, but playing the Martha Meir style jazz pieces will only give you the faintest inkling of the rhythmic structure and feel (I know, have been there, done that with similar sax stuff). The only way to really get it is to listen to as much as possible, recordings and best of all live, it's a better and faster way of learning than any amount of written exercises.



I'd agree with that.

Oh right. That's interesting about Martha Meir style pieces T Sax. Given me food for thought.

Miochy - I really hope it didn't sound as if I was saying a classically trained pianist could never understand jazz!!! Obviously that's not true as many great jazz pianists were originally classically trained and were able to make the transition with time, study and a genuine appreciation of jazz.

To the original poster I just meant - if you need an accompanist for your jazz exam, it'd be a lot quicker and easier for both of you if you find somebody already versed in jazz piano. In my experience accompanists are often busy, mainly classical players who just don't have the time to start absorbing a whole new genre just for one bout of accompanying. After a lot of hunting to find somebody available on that day, we managed to find an experienced pianist who had worked as a jazzer (for my son's Grade 5 exam). He turned out to be just perfect as he was utterly relaxed in the style, swung like crazy and enhanced my son's performance without doubt. This is not to say a classical pianist without experience of jazz couldn't have muddled through, but none of the classical-only accompanists I asked seemed keen, and were all relieved when I found somebody else!

Oh and Tsax is 100% right about listening to lots of jazz. I'd say listen to as much as you can - New Orleans, swing, bebop, mainstream, modern, avant-garde - until you find what rocks your boat the most. Then start collecting and absorb, absorb, absorb...

Violinia

But does a pianist need to "absorb a whole genre" just to accompany three short, easy pieces?

The accompaniments are not that hard for the jazz exams... And any pianist with ability and a musical ear would be able to play them convincingly!

Possibly not, not being a pianist of any type I don't really know. The difference with the jazz exams though is that you can use a CD backing with full rhythm section as an alternative. So the only reason for using a live accompanist is if they're going to add something you won't get from the CD. I know a decent jazz pianist really helps me to play to my best, but someone who's not really into jazz? I don't know, I think I'd probably play it safe with the CD.

Interesting point Manek.

Yes, it is only for 3 pieces and I'm sure with a rehearsal, they would produce a good performance and pass and then move on to the next grade.

I suppose for an actual performance with an audience, then they would both have to be good jazz musicians and equal. Then the audience would be looking at the performance of both jazz artists.

However, in an exam situation, you wouldn't want the jazz pianist to 'show up' the instrument being examined!!

Hmm..made me think, that one.

What could a live pianist give that a backing track couldn't? Well, mainly, sympathy...

By which I mean that you can talk to your pianist beforehand and agree things... For example, you could add rubato, and put in extra/different dynamic contrasts - this wouldn't be possible with a CD...

Also, if you go wrong, a CD simply ploughs on regardless... A live accompanist, on the other hand, would notice your mistake, and be sympathetic to your playing - listen to you, and know when and where you plan to come back in, so that they can come back in with you...

True, but with the CD backing you can have played with it and practised countless times so you know exactly what is going to happen. In fact you almost definitely will have practised with it many times. The accompanist is going to sound different, if only because you'll lack the drums and bass. One of the pitfalls of backing CDs I find myself falling into is that because the backing is always exactly the same I end up playing fairly similar improvised ideas each time - maybe the bass line or comping will suggest something in terms of phrasing or style. I also find I'll subconsciously use particular patterns in the backing as a cue for where I am in the changes then get caught out when I play it with my teacher providing the backing because the same cues aren't there.

Although I've called these pitfalls I can imagine they would be advantages in an exam situation.

In fact, I think the ABRSM has got it wrong by not insisting on live accompaniment, as it stands it's possible to prepare for, sit and pass the exams without ever playing with another person. To my mind that's not what jazz is all about, but neither is it about playing with somebody who is reading the dots. A candidate for a classical exam wouldn't expect the accompaniment to have the right kind of feel and harmony but otherwise be improvised on the spot - that would be completely wrong for the situation and the skills being assessed. The same holds in reverse for a jazz candidate.

If the ABRSM is serious about examining jazz and not jazz-style playing I don't think they've got the format of the exams right. It appears as though they've taken what is a very successful format for the classical exams, changed the list of pieces and thrown in a bit of improvisation to get to the jazz exam format. I think they'd have done better by starting with a blank piece of paper and potentially creating a very different format for the jazz exams.

One idea could be that for every jazz examining session there is an ABRSM supplied rhythm section (piano, drums and bass) that is used to accompany each candidate - the pianists would then benefit from the drummer and bass player. Part of the exam could include 4s with the rhythm section to assess how well the candidate listens to and communicates with the people they play with. The scales section could include the requirement to improvise for 8/12 bars or so in a given key with the rhythm section backing. There would obviously be cost implications to this but using the same accompanists for all candidates could well cancel out the increased cost of requiring 3 people rather than one. Potentially more than one candidate could be examined at once as well....hmm lots of possibilities.

Good idea about the Board providing a "house band" for the exams... Love it!


Plus - I'd love to be the drummer for it!

There's a surprise

get a pianist because they can work with you and the CD is at a set tempo etc so can't be moulded to your needs. Also I like to have an accopanist because it means its not just you and the examiner at first!

The piano accompaniments are very nice and your pianist does'nt have to be jazz trained as all the dots are written down for them to play. I've generally used the backing Cd's but i'm starting to feel this is'nt really in the spirit of jazz.

The piano parts are only £2 for each song(here i'm discussing grades 4-5), so thats only £6 for the piano parts per exam, which are readily available from Allegro Music through the the link supplied by the ABRSM publishing company.