My Funny Valentine, Miles Davis y la improvisación

Este artículo utiliza la conocida canción popular My Funny Valentine y una grabación particular de esta realizada por Miles Davis como base para analizar algunos procesos psicológicos en la improvisación y en la composición musical. Se desarrollan cuatro temas principales, entre ellos las formas en que los músicos que improvisan son capaces de reinterpretar completamente la estructura de una pieza, y se examinan las implicaciones de esto para la educación y la creatividad musical. También se exploran algunos de los procesos que permitela improvisación y se evalúan sus implicaciones educativas.

From Columbia Studio B to Carnegie Hall: The Studio-to-Stage Creative Trajectory in the Fusion Jazz of Miles Davis

<p>This thesis proposes an interrelationship between the creative processes of the recording studio and the concert stage in the fusion jazz of Miles Davis. Recent scholarship highlights the importance of the recording studio to fusion jazz musicians as they developed unique approaches to composition and improvisation. While providing valuable insight into the studio-derived creative processes distinctive of fusion jazz, this scholarship inadvertently obscures some of the live performance practices of fusion jazz musicians. Turning attention towards live performance, yet without neglecting the insights of this recent scholarship, I consider how the creative processes forged by Davis in the recording studio manifested in his activities as a concert artist. Combining commentary on Davis’s formative fusion jazz studio recordings (produced between 1969 and 1972) with analyses of the live album Dark Magus (exemplary of his mid-1970s concert performances), this thesis suggests a reorientation in Davis’s conceptions of improvisation and composition during this period by highlighting some of the creative processes he engaged in, both in the recording studio and on the concert stage. Drawing on the accounts of several musicians who worked with Davis in the recording studio during the late-1960s and early-1970s, I consider how post production tape editing allowed Davis and his band a new means for composing and improvising in the studio. Then, to demonstrate what I have termed a studio-to-stage creative trajectory, I analyse two creative processes common to Davis’s mid-1970s concerts as evidenced in Dark Magus: Davis’s on-stage direction of sudden, rhythm section cuts in the midst of lead instrumentalists’ improvisations; and the featured use of two accompanimental instruments unusual to jazz performance—a YC45 electric organ (played by Davis ) and a drum machine (played by percussionist James Mtume). Finally, framing this studio-to-stage creative trajectory in terms of performance theorist Philip Auslander’s concept of liveness, I claim that Davis’s fusion jazz stands as an example of mediatization rich in human agency. I then suggest that the work of other fusion jazz musicians and musicians associated with other jazz styles could be usefully reappraised using a similar methodology that explores the role of record production in creative process</p>

From Columbia Studio B to Carnegie Hall: The Studio-to-Stage Creative Trajectory in the Fusion Jazz of Miles Davis

<p>This thesis proposes an interrelationship between the creative processes of the recording studio and the concert stage in the fusion jazz of Miles Davis. Recent scholarship highlights the importance of the recording studio to fusion jazz musicians as they developed unique approaches to composition and improvisation. While providing valuable insight into the studio-derived creative processes distinctive of fusion jazz, this scholarship inadvertently obscures some of the live performance practices of fusion jazz musicians. Turning attention towards live performance, yet without neglecting the insights of this recent scholarship, I consider how the creative processes forged by Davis in the recording studio manifested in his activities as a concert artist. Combining commentary on Davis’s formative fusion jazz studio recordings (produced between 1969 and 1972) with analyses of the live album Dark Magus (exemplary of his mid-1970s concert performances), this thesis suggests a reorientation in Davis’s conceptions of improvisation and composition during this period by highlighting some of the creative processes he engaged in, both in the recording studio and on the concert stage. Drawing on the accounts of several musicians who worked with Davis in the recording studio during the late-1960s and early-1970s, I consider how post production tape editing allowed Davis and his band a new means for composing and improvising in the studio. Then, to demonstrate what I have termed a studio-to-stage creative trajectory, I analyse two creative processes common to Davis’s mid-1970s concerts as evidenced in Dark Magus: Davis’s on-stage direction of sudden, rhythm section cuts in the midst of lead instrumentalists’ improvisations; and the featured use of two accompanimental instruments unusual to jazz performance—a YC45 electric organ (played by Davis ) and a drum machine (played by percussionist James Mtume). Finally, framing this studio-to-stage creative trajectory in terms of performance theorist Philip Auslander’s concept of liveness, I claim that Davis’s fusion jazz stands as an example of mediatization rich in human agency. I then suggest that the work of other fusion jazz musicians and musicians associated with other jazz styles could be usefully reappraised using a similar methodology that explores the role of record production in creative process</p>

Creativity in Jazz

<p>Common discourses around jazz generally acknowledge the centrality of creativity to the music, but scholarship on what precisely creativity is in jazz, and how it might best be enhanced is not well developed. Building on the important work in this area begun by scholars such as Ed Sarath and R. Keith Sawyer, I first investigate the extensive scholarly literature on creativity, drawing predominantly from social science and education contexts, and then apply some of the most relevant frameworks to jazz. These frameworks draw several key aspects of jazz practice into sharp relief, in particular the respective roles of individuals and ensembles and the ways they work in common, and the provenance of musical materials in creative jazz practice. With these key ideas acting as a theoretical lens, I view the historical practice of three unquestionably creative jazz musicians: Ornette Coleman, Miles Davis and Duke Ellington. The choice of these musicians in particular is important because their example, when understood through the lens of creativity, in part authenticates some of the traditional tools by which we investigate jazz, historically, while at the same time pointing towards some different, less commonly discussed attributes. Most important, the creativity lens reveals important ways in which creative practice can be attributable to understandable procedures that are available to all accomplished musicians, not just a few “great men”. Thus my conclusions call into question more traditional modes of jazz history and criticism which, while acknowledging the music’s collective nature, tend to emphasise the roles of individuals as primary in jazz. Instead, my research suggests that creativity is best achieved in group contexts where diversely gifted participants work collaboratively in egalitarian, interactive, improvised settings. Individuals do make significant contributions to this mix, and in terms of creative advances in jazz – and in terms of achieving meaningful self-expression – the most important quality individual musicians can pursue is the development and expression of unique musical voices. In addition to improvised interactivity among unique individual voices, the adoption of musical materials from outside of jazz and their transformations (along with similar transformations of musical materials already common currency among jazz musicians) can be shown to serve both the expressive goals of musicians and propel jazz in creative and potentially fruitful directions. It is the improvised colloquy of such individual voices, transforming received and newly acquired musical materials in the service of self-expression, that contributed to the lasting allure of the music attributed to Ornette Coleman, Miles Davis and Duke Ellington. Saxophonist Jan Garbarek is proposed as a contemporary musician who has made use of all of these strategies in forging jazz music that demonstrates fidelity to the core processes of jazz while only provisionally embracing some of the style features of earlier forms of the music – style features that common jazz discourses have tended to emphasise at the expense of the processes that gave rise to them.</p>

Creativity in Jazz

<p>Common discourses around jazz generally acknowledge the centrality of creativity to the music, but scholarship on what precisely creativity is in jazz, and how it might best be enhanced is not well developed. Building on the important work in this area begun by scholars such as Ed Sarath and R. Keith Sawyer, I first investigate the extensive scholarly literature on creativity, drawing predominantly from social science and education contexts, and then apply some of the most relevant frameworks to jazz. These frameworks draw several key aspects of jazz practice into sharp relief, in particular the respective roles of individuals and ensembles and the ways they work in common, and the provenance of musical materials in creative jazz practice. With these key ideas acting as a theoretical lens, I view the historical practice of three unquestionably creative jazz musicians: Ornette Coleman, Miles Davis and Duke Ellington. The choice of these musicians in particular is important because their example, when understood through the lens of creativity, in part authenticates some of the traditional tools by which we investigate jazz, historically, while at the same time pointing towards some different, less commonly discussed attributes. Most important, the creativity lens reveals important ways in which creative practice can be attributable to understandable procedures that are available to all accomplished musicians, not just a few “great men”. Thus my conclusions call into question more traditional modes of jazz history and criticism which, while acknowledging the music’s collective nature, tend to emphasise the roles of individuals as primary in jazz. Instead, my research suggests that creativity is best achieved in group contexts where diversely gifted participants work collaboratively in egalitarian, interactive, improvised settings. Individuals do make significant contributions to this mix, and in terms of creative advances in jazz – and in terms of achieving meaningful self-expression – the most important quality individual musicians can pursue is the development and expression of unique musical voices. In addition to improvised interactivity among unique individual voices, the adoption of musical materials from outside of jazz and their transformations (along with similar transformations of musical materials already common currency among jazz musicians) can be shown to serve both the expressive goals of musicians and propel jazz in creative and potentially fruitful directions. It is the improvised colloquy of such individual voices, transforming received and newly acquired musical materials in the service of self-expression, that contributed to the lasting allure of the music attributed to Ornette Coleman, Miles Davis and Duke Ellington. Saxophonist Jan Garbarek is proposed as a contemporary musician who has made use of all of these strategies in forging jazz music that demonstrates fidelity to the core processes of jazz while only provisionally embracing some of the style features of earlier forms of the music – style features that common jazz discourses have tended to emphasise at the expense of the processes that gave rise to them.</p>

The Bass-less Trio

<p>Miles Davis asserts in his autobiography, that "a great artist needs to be able to stretch" [Davis, Troup, 1990]. While I may not a great artist, I aspire to make art with my music, and in my own musical journey I have been interested in trying out new ideas. Jazz musicians, because of their various skills (and in particular, in the art of improvisation) find themselves straddling musical boundaries and genres, just to pay the rent. In my own projects however, this musical adroitness was born just as much out of artistic curiosity as it was necessity, leading me to compose and perform in a variety of contexts and styles for a broad range of instrumentation. These contexts and styles include: duos for saxophone and piano accordion; Bach sonatas with string ensembles; improvising live dance music with DJs; organ trios; in electronica contexts; art and poetry collaborations. The need for creativity has expressed itself in all of my work, to varying degrees. On reflection, it's the need to create something new and fresh out of work and ideas that are already explored to some extent. This desire is consistent with the jazz legacy I have inherited. In much the way Louis Armstrong began transforming popular songs into jazz vehicles, Charles Mingus took ideas from older African American musical traditions and transformed them to offer a fresh perspective on those traditions, and Miles Davis borrowed ideas from rock and soul music to pioneer new directions in jazz during the 1960s and 1970s, I too am looking for new avenues of expression for jazz musicians.</p>

The Bass-less Trio

<p>Miles Davis asserts in his autobiography, that "a great artist needs to be able to stretch" [Davis, Troup, 1990]. While I may not a great artist, I aspire to make art with my music, and in my own musical journey I have been interested in trying out new ideas. Jazz musicians, because of their various skills (and in particular, in the art of improvisation) find themselves straddling musical boundaries and genres, just to pay the rent. In my own projects however, this musical adroitness was born just as much out of artistic curiosity as it was necessity, leading me to compose and perform in a variety of contexts and styles for a broad range of instrumentation. These contexts and styles include: duos for saxophone and piano accordion; Bach sonatas with string ensembles; improvising live dance music with DJs; organ trios; in electronica contexts; art and poetry collaborations. The need for creativity has expressed itself in all of my work, to varying degrees. On reflection, it's the need to create something new and fresh out of work and ideas that are already explored to some extent. This desire is consistent with the jazz legacy I have inherited. In much the way Louis Armstrong began transforming popular songs into jazz vehicles, Charles Mingus took ideas from older African American musical traditions and transformed them to offer a fresh perspective on those traditions, and Miles Davis borrowed ideas from rock and soul music to pioneer new directions in jazz during the 1960s and 1970s, I too am looking for new avenues of expression for jazz musicians.</p>

Embodiment, Autoethnography, Performance Poetry: Living with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

This presentation offers neurodivergence embodied, autoethnography, and performance poetry. The confluence of acquiring severe traumatic brain injury combined with exposure to concepts and paradigms while pursuing a graduate degree in Disability Studies, catalyzed emergence and triggered development of my disabled identity. The brain damage acquired causes issues of decoding/deciphering/processing, which in turn triggers and/or produces episodes of temporal dissonance. When these shifts in timing occur, they have tremendous impact on rational thought processes and emotional stability. The salient aspects of my new life – emotional sensitivity and volatility – may on the surface seem detrimental and undesirable; however, I celebrate these qualities as they greatly enhance my identification with and empathy for others, which in turn drive my artistic, social, cultural, political expression, quest for community and belonging. While temporal dissonance is unlikely to occur during this planned short presentation, I will relate and provide the audience with windows on largely hidden and little understood forms of impairment. Note: To hear recitation of some of these poems, check out fellow VIBE presenter Cheryl Green’s podcast: http://whoamitostopit.com/pigeonhole-podcast-17-autoethnographic-poetry/ The original presentation at VIBE was accompanied by music from Miles Davis and Marcus Miller’s 1987 album Music from Siesta. Readers are encouraged to listen to this album via their music platform of choice while reading the following poetry. Youtube link to the album: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuvtNL_jyeQ

Research on the Influence of Music

As for question 1, based on the directed relationship between influencers and followers, we building a network of musicians based on influential relationships. A Music Influence Evaluation Model (MIEM) was also established, and the model formula is shown in the text. We then select the top 200 artists in the “music influence” ranking to build a subnet. The larger the subnet node, the more lines are extended. Indicating that the node represents the musician’s influence is large and extensive. From the graph, we can see that Bob Dylan is influential, but the breadth of influence is not enough; Miles Davis influenced a wide range of music factions.As for question 2?We have developed a Music Similarity Evaluation Model (MSEM) to calculate the contribution parameters of fifteen different music metrics. Using fully connected neural networks combined with triple loss to solve the answer. According to the characteristics of Triple Loss, we can make the similar nodes in the space closer together and the dissimilar nodes further apart. After training, our neural network is able to distinguish artists very well. The results were obtained: artists within genres are far more similar than artists between genres, and a classification image of musicians from different genres was produced.As for question 3, a comparative plot of characteristics revealed that music genres also have their own particular musical characteristics. The comprehensive analysis concludes that the difference between genres is mainly reflected by the six features of valence, tempo, mode, key, acousticness, and instrumentalness, and this result is verified by k-means clustering. By plotting the percentage of influence as well as the change of musical characteristics, it was concluded that the influence of genres changes over time; some musical characteristics in genres also change over time. Finally, the similarity between each faction is calculated and plotted as a heat map, and the genres with high similarity must have interrelated relationships with each other.As for question 4, we have developed a Music Influence T-test Model (MITM). We hypothesized that “influencers” would not influence followers to create music, and a t-test using SPSS rejected the original hypothesis and concluded that “influencers” would influence followers to create music. Additionally, Contagious Evaluation Model(CEM) was also be created. We established the “contagious” index and calculated the Pearson correlation coefficients between “contagious” and 15 musical characteristics, and obtained the results: energy, loudness, and acousticness are more “contagious” than other characteristics. Results: energy, loudness and acousticness are more “contagious” than other features.As for question 5, a time series plot of the variation for each musical characteristic with year was plotted and the analysis yielded the following conclusion: There are characteristics that signify revolutions in musical evolution from these data. For example, the music after 1960s showed changes characterized by higher rhythmicity, faster tempo, and fewer spoken words. Based on these musical evolutionary changes, combined with the “musical influence” we calculated earlier, we select five musical change-makers: The Beatles, Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones, Miles Davis and Jimi Hendrix.As for question 6, we combined musical influences to identify the most influential musicians in each genre in each era as dynamic influencers to represent the music of the genre in that period. Creating images of their musical characteristics over time and analyzing them in relation to the history of musical development led to the conclusion that an artist’s musical identity changes with technology, social development, and changes in genre representation?As for question 7, a Network Connectivity Evaluation Model(NCEM) was developed to measure which artists in the music network were heavily influenced by external factors during the time period. The first and middle of the 20th century were found to be highly connected online, and this period coincided with a period of social upheaval, with the Cold War, World War II, the Industrial Revolution, and the rapid development of the Internet having a great impact on music, from which many new musical styles were born.