I am a VERY new cello player, but a somewhat expirienced, self-taught pianist.

As such, I cannot read sheet music.

Now, playing piano and not knowing how to read sheet music creates a problem. It's alot like being in another country and not speaking the language. And much like that imaginary situation, you learn to speak the language of your instrument by listening to it. You pick up on what note expresses what emotions; scales start to just fall into place, like an accent you gain from being around it. Chords start to make sense.

And the world is opened up in an entirely new way- you speak the language, eventually, more fluently than the one with sophisticated education on the matter.

All that I do is improv and play by ear- occasionally. Though is is somewhat common on the guitar, it is apparently a little more rare on the piano. Many are facinated that a technical instrument like the piano can be learned like that, i.e. without instruction and theory. But it sounds very nice, and I have progressed much faster than if I had taken lessons for an equivelent amount of time.

Learning to improv is a matter of making the cello an extension of your soul; indeed, there is no other way to describe me and the piano.

Technical improv books will probably teach you some theory on using the scales your chords are in to add in some single notes, changing up your chord, chord progression theory, etc. But if you just dedicate yourself to making yourself try it without music- it just starts to happen.

That's my say on the matter.

"The music may stop now and then, But the the strings will remain forever..." -anonomous

And here's a member of this community that has mastered te singing/cello playing concept, who I really like now that I've heard her: http://www.lindsaymac.com/

enjoy.

"The music may stop now and then, But the the strings will remain forever..." -anonomous

Just curious.... is the original poster still around? Wondering if any of this helped. And are you making progress?

Paul Goelz
Rochester Hills, MI USA
paul at pgoelz dot com
www.pgoelz.com

I simply cannot believe what I am hearing here... Improv on the cello is NOT easier without knowledge of how to read music! ...and especially without knowledge of music theory. How on earth can you say, lackinglatin, that playing by ear can allow you to "speak the (musical) language more fluently than one with sophisticated education on the matter"? That has got to be the most ridiculous, ignorant statement I've heard in a very long time. Simply because one plays an instrument that often does use sheet music, does not, by ANY stretch of the imagination, imply that such musicians are crippled or even dependent on such materials. I know many, to include myself, who compose and improvise often and I can tell you that if you do not have the ability to visualize or even write down the music that you're trying to improvise, you will run into far greater roadblocks than one who can. That, and you will find a "cap" placed on your level of progress.

A formal education in music provides one with all of the proper tools to take performance into any arena. Any statements to the contrary are simply made out of bitterness or derived from a very jaded and uneducated perspective. ...I simply do not understand how you can possibly surmise that one who has studied the evolution of music over the course of 1,000 years, performed much of it, learned the inner workings of music theory in all of its permutations, is going to be less credible or able than some average joe who is self-"taught" and "plays by ear". ...it's just plain laughable.

One especially needs knowledge and comprehension of theory. If you don't have this, you're just plain sunk. It's all too important to know and understand how your instrument or part relates to the whole (even on the most microcosmic levels), otherwise one's chordal structures, harmonic progressions, and intervalic relationships will likely be completely out-of-whack...or just plain uninteresting.

ADDENDUM:
This is not to discourage anyone from exploring and from trying to learn by any means necessary (even if that means being self-"taught").
But I am discouraging musical ignorance and strongly ENCOURAGING those who have reached a certain point in their individual endeavors to then TAKE IT TO NEXT LEVEL! It's cheap enough to call a graduate student from a local school for lessons. Having a teacher will also greatly reduce any chances for physical injury (believe it or not, this is a great risk...especially with string instruments).

Sorry this is long, but lackinglatin struck a chord in me (pun intended)...my tirade is over. Best of luck to all...

... to all who contributed, very interesting.

To answer the question (if it was for me) whether I am getting any better, the answer is "don't know". Unfortunately, I haven't really been doing any, as I've been concentrating on building conventional technique.

Now I suppose it is an interesting question whether doing improv would significantly assist my technique building in general. I feel it would inprove my confidence, and musiciality, but these things aren't easy to measure in the same way as demonstrable progress through a book of etudes...

May I add my endorsement to the mention of Lindsay Mac above, her debut CD is superb in every way, available at: http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/lindsaymac

EthanD, your comment has made me so angry I don't know how to reply with a proper response. I will only say this for the moment; the two most adept story tellers I ever met in my life were both totally illiterate.

Once you're through growing, you're through. - Benjamin Franklin

I am a cellist with many years of classical training who then took a detour and spent years working on improv techniques on guitars and electric bass - then I found that the techniques I already knew on the cello allowed me to improv even better than on other instruments. For me it is like two different musical mindsets coming together.

Without having diverged into other realms of musical expression I could easily have gotten stuck in the Classical Box- and I certainly know great musicians who are experiencing this!!!!!.

However, without the intense disciplined training, I would not have nearly so much to work with...... I liken it to having a whole shop full of specialized tools, rather that just a swiss army knife. The beauty of this metaphor is that a person can survive quite nicely with just a swiss army knife if they have to!!!!!!.

Though I was a bit put off by the incendiary nature of Ethan's post, there is one thing he said that I can certainly relate to. Having played a lot of rock and roll and other non classical cello professionally over the last few years , I have developed tendonitis problems in my right thumb.....I belive mostly due to poor technique while playing rock and roll. This has forced me to really go back to simple bowing exercises and to play Bach suites concentrating on lightness in bowing ( which of course is carrying over into all the music I do) - it is easy to get carried away and forget delicacy sometimes, whereas playing classical music does not let you get away with this! I am also teaching a beginning adult student which more than anything has made me think about basic technique again.

I realize that there are also some techniques involved in improv that are very rare or non-existent in classical music, so therefore there is no "Proper Technique" yet- it is up to to us to develop that!!!!! But I do know that the key is RELAX

one note on rock n roll vs classical- the two are not always mutually exclusive-if you don't believe me, play through the last movement of the 3rd Bach suite........

Peace, man

clayman

Hi Ethan,

I played the mountain and hammered dulcimers, the banjo and the autoharp for years before I even learned the technical relationships between notes in a chord. Did it limit me in any way at all? No. I played instinctively. Maybe I just have music in me. But I certianly did not need any sort of formal music education to let it come out. And I absolutely did not need to read music to do it. I still don't read music. I learn tunes by ear and I firmly think that is a better way to approach the folk music that I play. Because it encourages improvisation and experimentation.

Don't get me wrong. I am not advocating ignorance. There are times that I regret not having a more formal musical education. There are times that I regret not being able to read music. But when I started playing there were no lessons available on my chosen instrument so I just sat down and figured it out. And there was no written music to speak of.... it was strictly the aural tradition. As the years rolled by and as I began to participate in jam sessions and then in performances, I learned what I needed to know about accompanyment and "theory" from simply doing it and finding out what worked and what did not.

Today I consider myself quite skilled in the art of accompanyment and improv. I am fluent on my "main" instrument, the hammered dulcimer. What is holding me back on the cello at present is the process of making it work, not the process of figuring out what to play.

I am sure there are classically trained musicians out there who are very skilled in improv. But for the most part, I have not run into them. I have, however, run into many classical violinists who cannot play a note (or at least refuse to try) unless they have the sheet music in front of them. And I have to say, this is spreading into the dulcimer community too.

I guess what I am trying to say (after rambling a bit) is that I do not feel that any sort of formal musical theory is REQUIRED to improvise. All that is needed is a good ear and a willingness to experiment. And of course some skills on the instrument of choice.

Maybe we are roughly saying the same thing? I may not have a formal musical education and I may not even be able to always tell you WHAT I am doing. But that doesn't stop me from doing it. Perhaps what I have picked up intuitively may be similar to some of what is taught in music theory classes.

By the way, I don't just bash away in public. I try very hard to be musical and lyrical. These days it works more often than not. But when it doesn't, I stop. Or I switch to the dulcimer.

Paul Goelz
Rochester Hills, MI USA
paul at pgoelz dot com
www.pgoelz.com

The tone of your comments is self-assured not to say a little arrogant. You speak as if what you say is axiomatic and only a fool could disagree, when in fact your remarks are highly controversial as preceeding posts have demonstrated.

Paul you make a strong point, namely the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Almost without exception, the highly classically trained musicians that I have encountered are woefully incapable without music before them or a good memory. Conversely the list of exceptionally talented and inspiring performers with zero musical training or sight reading ability is endless. This is not to suggest some easy connection, rather it highlights the complexity and mystery of the well-spring of creativity and musicality.

I speak as one with 14 years of formal classical training, interupted by 7 years improvising on the guitar, which saved me from the suffocating conformity of so much of the classical world. I do agree that technique is essential and a lack of that can quickly stifle progress but it simply isn't clear that theoretical knowledge is a prerequisite for great music making and sight-reading in particular can ultimately be antipathetic to improvisation. My highly experienced cello teacher accepts that as do many eminent performers and teachers.

Nevertheless, thanks for the polemic. It makes us all think a little more about where we're coming from and how we can move forwards and thats gotta be good!

www.pepperjam.moonfruit.com

Maybe a tough one: Any good ideas for translating the whole modal chromatic thing so prevalent in hard/post bop styles onto the cello? There's a few violinists who do it well (Ponty, Howes, Balakrishnan etc), but when I try to trancribe and play on the cello, I run out of fingers and facility pretty quick. Is it just to hard to listen and hope to imitate the 'treble' insrtruments? Thoughts and ideas valued greatly.

I'm not doing jazz on cello, but I have played some on trombone.

Simplify and suggest, leaving out clutter. With the more static instruments, you'll hear longer notes, more repetition of the same notes, and more direct, meaningful phrases rather than a whirlwind of notes.

You're right on, Chiddler!
I was talking about taking swing solos on cello with Andy Stein at a fiddle camp and he told me to listen to trombone solos in old swing and big bands. This changed my life! Up 'till then, I thought I had to be a fiddle! Now, I just have to learn to be a trombone and use far fewer notes.
See you soon.

Is that the Andy Stein on Prairie Home Companion? Cool!

Yes. He and Pat Donovan were at Rocky Mountain Fiddle Camp a couple of years ago. It was way cool!

Thank you all for your comments. It helps to clarify things.

I've been remarking that my role in a pop ensemble is not unlike that of a sax player. Solos, fills, textures. Sometimes one drops out altogether and let the music breathe a little bit until you find an appropriate moment to say something meaningful.

It's great fun, although if there's no bassist one finds oneself holding down the bottom line most of the time. That's when the 6-stringer really comes in handy!

I was just reading the whole thread about improvisation and training. I was somewhat classically trained (lessons with classical cellists through high school but I didn't get a "conservatory" education) and now I'm studying theory as part of my own personal study of jazz and latin music. The more I get into improvisation, the more I wish I had more extensive classical training -- mostly for the technique of getting the sound I want out of the cello. On the other hand, it has been a long and rewarding journey for me to teach myself to get off the page and play more by ear. I think the theory training actually helps me hear better, but it can also be inhibiting if I get caught up in playing the "right" notes too much. My overall thoughts are -- do as much of BOTH as you possibly can. If you're teaching beginning cellists, please incorporate improvisation as well as reading into your work -- I wish I'd had more of that early on. There's really no war between the two approaches -- the best jazz and latin string players I hear have plenty of classical training behind them as well. I'm glad to have found you all as inspiration!
Laura Boytz

I've posted a discussion of fiddle tune accompaniment patterns, along with links to a midi and pdf, which may interest some readers oftthis forum, on the ICS Cellist By Night board.

How exciting, I had no idea this forum existed. I would just like to add that it has been my experience that being literate in western european harmony is not necesarily the best education for improvisation. It has also been my experience teaching that people with less formal training in classical music and theory had an easier time mastering rythmic and oral communication of melody. It is not unlike the people you meet who studied french for 10 years in school and can read and write fluently but are not able to have a conversation. I think it is important to remember that some of the greatest musicians in the world only play in one key their whole life and never modulate.(and some of them only use 5 notes although the notes are not tempered)It does not mean that more knowledge will hurt you, it just means that it might not help you. I personally believe having a strong spiritual connection is more important than anything if you want to make music.

In response to emulating hard/post bop. I think you would have more food for thought out of learning hendrix solos. The phenomena of the guitar pickup feedback in proximity to the amplifier is the exact same phenomena as the bow proximity to the bridge. I think getting inside the sound and phrasing of hendrix and relating it to the bowed string traditions of the near and middle east will give you more grounding in a natural cello vocabulary. When you get inside the quarter tone alterations of the blues scale you find the need to play complex chord changes and substitutions less compelling. One well placed quarter tone (although they are not really quarters) can have have all the impact of multiple modulations and as we play non fretted instruments we are ideally suited for this voice. Saxaphones are sort of like interval machines, bowed string instruments excel at different aesthetics, but i suppose it is all depending on your personal inclinations.

I'm sorry I didn't work up the nerve to say hi to you at your last gig here in DC. Love your playing, sir!

Trust me, everyone, anything this guy says on improv is worth listening to...

My cello teacher and I just started working through David Baker's Expressions book, which was written with cello in mind. His "fretting" concept for scale/arp fingerings is more challenging at the outset than the semi-comfortable first-position fingerings that use open string notes, but with my guitar background, I fully understand the advantage of working easily transposable fingerings (easily in that they do not rely on open strings).

My teacher and I met through Persian music school. She's much more serious about it than I was - I couldn't handle it and jazz and being in a band and a day job all at the same time. I dropped out after learning Dastagh Mahoor and Dastagh Shuur (and most of its Gusheh).

Rufus, I hope you will hang out here more!