Surface Structure vs. Deep Structure Part II

In my previous post, I spoke a bit about surface structure and deep structure, their linguistic implications, and how they may apply to improvisational pedagogy. In this post, I'll share some examples of how I use these techniques in my own playing and teaching.

Dave Liebman says "Learn from the fathers, not the sons" and this is a hallmark in my study. Transcription serves as the point of entry for all of my study and the transcription I do is of "Primary Sources" - more about that later. We'll start with a Warne Marsh ii7 V7 line I recently transcribed:

This line constitutes a "surface structure" statement. Many would use take this line through all keys and begin to use it over similar harmonic progressions, much the same way we would quote a line of Frost or Shakespeare. It would function very well, and give us very usable vocabulary. There is, however, much more that can be mined from this line. By using a series of transformations, in this case all based on traditional "theme and variations" technique, we can develop much more vocabulary that is original but shares the same "deep structure" as Warne's original line. Here are some examples:

We see that after some rather basic transformations, we have 5 new surface structure statements that all share the deep structure of the original line. Each of these lines can then be practiced through keys and used as vocabulary for improvisation.

Our next step is to return to the original line and really isolate the deep structure. What is the essential construction of this line? What makes it work? One solution follows:

This deep structure now becomes the basis for development of more original material through the process of transformation as discussed above. The next post will go through that process.

It is clear that approaching vocabulary development this way can result in a much deeper well of material than we would have by simply learning and using Warne's line. The beautiful thing is that all newly developed material has Warne's material as its deep structure. Because of this, most transformations will retain the strength and logic of the original line.

Surface Structure vs. Deep Structure

I have been going between two different approaches in my practicing lately. The first is a very traditional approach to learning to improvise: learning pieces of vocabulary (licks), taking them through all keys, and inserting them over appropriate harmonic situations in tunes. The other is an approach that I first came across in Jerry Bergonzi's great book "Melodic Structures" and have seen amplified by Ed Saindon. In this method, a small cell of notes is drawn from the chord scale in use, permutations are practiced and this becomes the raw material for improvisation. The cells are then rhythm-ized, "edited" and the player is left with harmonically and rhythmic sound language.

I have always had a hard time with the first approach. I never feel that I am really deeply connected to the vocabulary when I approach it this way. Using vocabulary that I have learned this way always feels forced.

The second method resonates more deeply with me. It made sense as soon as I started using it, and I feel MUCH more in control of my improvisation as well as more creative.

I have read bits about Noam Chomsky's ideas about linguistics, specifically the ideas of surface structure and deep structure and I feel that these two approaches mirror, in a very general way, Chomsky's model.

The first method is the surface structure; you are learning the sentence and using it verbatim. The second method is the deep structure; you are learning the building blocks of the sentence, understanding the linguistic transformations that take place, and using those rules to create your own sentence.

In my next post, I will post some examples of the two methods.

Sunday Video - Gerry Mulligan

Great writing and playing on "Walkin' Shoes"

The Sound

I am listening to Stan Getz.

Any time I put one of his records on my first thought is "why do I EVER listen to anyone else?!?!" Getz often gets "sorted" into kind of a holdover from the swing era - nothing could be further from the truth. His playing in the 80s right up until he passed (my favorite period, by the way) is as rhythmically, harmonically and sonically advanced and adventurous as anyone but to me, and unlike other adventurous players, Getz steeped everything through a deep well of swing and taste.

One of my favorite things about Stan's playing is what I call the sense of inevitability that his lines have. A great example of this can be heard on "Stan's Blues" from the album "But Beautiful" recorded with Bill Evans. He takes several unaccompanied choruses and EVERYTHING, time, harmony and melody is so clear that as I listen to it, my reaction is that there could be no other choice. His lines are THAT definitive. That kind of clarity is what I strive for every day.

I think I'll be listening to Stan for a while...

Here's a nice clip of Getz with musical soul-mate Kenny Barron:

The Locals...

There is an interesting discussion going on over at A Blog Supreme dealing with "the great unknown" jazz artists. That is to say, the local cats on the scene who we don't see on the cover of Down Beat or hear at major festivals.

I've come across some VERY HEAVY local guys in my travels including the following, many of whom I've had the honor of collaborating and working with:

Hampton Roads, Virginia:

Jim Nesbit: Woodwinds
Eddie Williams: Saxophone
Roy Muth: Trumpet
Jackie Friend: Trumpet
Jimmy Masters: Bass
Chris Brydge: Bass
Howard Curtis (now in Austria): Drums
John Toomey: Piano

Naples Italy:

Giulio Martino: Saxophone
Tony Ronga: Bass

Chicago IL:

Jim Gailloreto: Saxophone
Ari Brown: Saxophone
Greg Fishman: Saxophone
Brad Wheeler: Saxophone
Karl Montzka: Piano
Eric Montzka: Drums
Dereck Polk: Bass
Tom Hipskind: Drums

Newport/Providence, RI:

Joe Parillo: Piano
Joe Potenza: Bass
Alex Chapman: Drums
Geno Rosati: Guitar

There are so many more, but these are some of my favorite folks to play with and listen to. We all know how important it is to support the local scene, who are some of the cats in your town?

13 Years Ago...

I have been following saxophone player Christopher Braig's blog over the past week and it has me feeling very reflective and nostalgic. Chris just returned from attending David Liebman's Saxophone Masterclass. I was a student at this class in 1997 and reading about his experience has had me thinking.

To say that it was a profound experience would be an understatement. People throw the phrase "life-changing" around a lot these days but for me, Lieb's masterclass was exactly that. I had never before been in such close every-day contact with a master of the art. Coupled with the very no-nonsense, methodical, and logical pedagogy he preaches and practices, I came away with a very clear blueprint of what to deal with and how.

But here's the rub...

To date, I have done very little of it! Let me be clear, the processes and pedagogy I took away from Lieb still informs everything I practice, but there is so much more I feel like I should have done by now (more about that word should in a moment). As with any intense experience, it can be a bit of a crash-landing back into reality afterwards. The flame burns for a few weeks, a couple of precious months, and then the mundane-ness of life creeps back into your artistic space. I catch myself every now and then and try to re-energize by listening. It always works and I vow to start over and get it right.

This bit, the starting over, is the problem. I always feel that when I fall off the path, I must go back to square one. Often this is right, but I find myself practicing things that, for the most part I am quite comfortable with in the guise of "rebuilding the foundation".

I have been thinking about incorporating the Zen idea of "the beginner's mind" into my practice. Maybe not going to square one, but dealing with where I am in the open and accepting mind of the absolute beginner. Not as "something to get through..."

Now, about that word should...the conditional tense causes lots of problems for artists. It makes us question our work and doubt the moment. Lieb even speaks about it when he talks about practicing, here is an example.

Be honest, be open, be objective...figure out what is missing AND GO RIGHT THERE.

That is the last line of my notes from my week with Lieb 13 years ago. I have some thinking to do...

My friend Steven...

has put some very eloquent thoughts together on the current "Mosque in Manhattan" discussions. I really don't think I can add to what he so bravely states here.