Custom
Printed Clothing
Hats, shirts, and other items imprinted with
custom logos, lettering and more!
From Chart to Reality: The Editorial Role of the Pianist in a Big Band Dr. Kurt Ellenberger October 2005
As
someone who has spent a great deal of time as a performer
in both the trumpet and rhythm sections of many professional
and college jazz bands, I can attest to the different approaches
to the written page that occurs within each section. The
rhythm player normally has a great deal of freedom, while
the horn player does not. For the rhythm player, many parts
are basically lead sheets, with some of the rhythmic figures
notated, which give the player considerable interpretive
leeway. Instinctively, the rhythm player begins to realize
that the part is not to be taken literally; it requires
significant personal input, within certain stylistic and
musical guidelines, of course. This is possible because
there is only one bassist, one pianist, and one drummer
in the band. Each player can more or less interpret his
or her part at will, without having the section descend
into complete anarchy.
For
the horn player, this amount of interpretive freedom is
simply not possible. This is in large part due to the numerical
reality of being one voice in a four or five member section
within a larger ensemble section numbering 14 or more. If
each player were to make the kinds of interpretive decisions
that are routinely made by members of the rhythm section,
the resulting confusion would certainly be unworkable musically.
As a result, horn players in a big band tend to look at
the music in a very literal sense, as they should. There
is some leeway here as well, but it is severely limited.
For example, a trumpet player may take a few pitches or
a phrase up (or down) an octave, or a trombone player may
rest during a unison line in order to save strength for
an upcoming passage. However exciting or pragmatic these
changes may be, they are fairly benign from an arranging
point of view. They do not significantly alter the arrangement.
They keep the arranger's intent largely intact and they
maintain the unity of the horns' harmonic and rhythmic activity.
A
horn player (or non-pianist) leading an ensemble will quite
naturally bring his or her background to the leadership
of the ensemble. Thus, when the classical pianist in the
high school big band is having trouble with the written
part, the horn player's natural response may be to insist
that the student learn the part exactly as written in the
score. Unfortunately, this type of solution is not ideal.
The role of the pianist in a big band setting
The role of the pianist in a big band is vastly different
from that in a small jazz group. First of all, the pianist
is generally much less active here than in any other group
setting. The reason for this is that there is a great deal
of rhythmic and harmonic activity present in the horn sections,
and hence a pianist who plays his or her own figures will
often be interfering with the overall rhythmic design of
the group. Thus, the big band pianist needs to be mature
enough to show real restraint, and also needs to be intimately
familiar with the horn parts. Given this reality, I believe
that arrangers have often been at a loss when writing piano
parts. This is likely due to the fact that composers or
arrangers are unsure of their target pianist. For example,
will the part be played by an advanced student of Jim McNeely's,
by an accomplished classical pianist who doesn't know what
"C7" means, or by a high school violinist with some piano
experience who has been drafted into the jazz band? The
disparities regarding jazz piano knowledge and skill may
be enormous within a non-professional big band setting.
The
pianist must listen carefully to the horns (in reality,
almost memorizing their figures), and must then determine
where a complementary piano figure (i.e., a chord or melodic
line) can be inserted into the overall texture. This is
no easy task. The best way to learn how to do this is to
listen to the great big band pianists – Count Basie or Duke
Ellington for example – and to emulate them. Unless a full-fledged
piano solo or feature is called for, these great pianists
barely play at all during ensemble presentations. Their
playing largely consists of brief harmonic or melodic figures
(tasteful, elegant, and often minimalist in manner), which
combine with the horn figures to create a natural sounding
overall musical texture. To use an old adage, less is more
when it comes to big band piano. It is not about how many
notes can be played; it is really about complementing the
group through the appropriate style of playing. In short,
a big band pianist must learn to be content with, for the
most part, a supporting role.
In
terms of notation, big band piano parts generally fall into
one of the following categories: a) chord symbols with rhythmic
notation, b) chord symbols without rhythmic notation, c)
fully notated parts, and d) improvised solos.1
Chord symbols with rhythmic notation
In this style of notation, chord symbols are featured above
a percussion-like style of rhythmic notation. The pianist
is given the rhythmic notation without any spelled-out chord
realizations (i.e., voicings). The rhythms shown are normally
used in one (or more) of the following ways: a) they are
identical to those that the horns are playing, b) they emphasize
(i.e., accent) certain pitches in a horn section's phrase,
or c) they are rhythm section "hits" or "kicks."
The
latter two types are inherently less rhythmically active
than the former. Thus, the latter two pose less of a technical
or interpretive problem; in short, they are necessarily
simpler. The first type poses some significant problems.
The
rhythms notated in Example 1a, from 61st and Rich' It
by Thad Jones, are of the first variety. They are identical
to the rhythms in the horn section, but the tempo is slow
enough to allow for almost all of them to be played without
undue difficulty.2
(See Example 1a.)
A FREE Adobe Acrobat reader
is required
to download and view examples.
The
fact that each chord is not spelled-out fully may present
a problem for an average high school or college band piano
player. Secondly, it may not be appropriate for the player
to try to play every rhythm, as this will result in an unnecessary
duplication of the horn figures, thus creating a musical
texture that may be too dense.
We
must assume that the pianist has the option of playing some
of these rhythmic figures (using his or her own voicings),
while omitting others. How are these important decisions
made? A careful listening to the phrasings and articulations
of the horns will help the pianist to choose rhythms that
punctuate or emphasize the horn phrases.3
Example
1b, from Don't Git Sassy by Thad Jones, is extremely
detailed in terms of both chords and rhythms, some of which
are only a sixteenth note in duration. This type of chart
is difficult because it does not differentiate between structural
harmonies and embellishments (e.g., neighbor chords, passing
chords, etc.).4
A professional will see through all of the elaborate ornamentation
and quickly get to the basic structure of a piece, and thus
be able to play with considerable freedom. However, less
experienced pianists will not be able to do this type of
reductive analysis. To many, the piece will seem to be an
anomaly rather than a variation on a common form (as this
piece is). Without this understanding, a relaxed performance
will be difficult to obtain. (See Example 1b)
What
then, is the form and structure of this piece? It is a very
simple eight-measure form (with a few variations) that is
closely related to the blues. This is not immediately apparent
because of the myriad (and brilliant) embellishing chords
found surrounding the simple structure at the heart of the
piece.5
The sheer number and complexity of these harmonic embellishments
make it necessary for the pianist to make some editorial
decisions. Jones' chart provides us with a great deal of
information, but his intent is more likely to show us when
not to play, so as not to interfere with the integrity of
the horn parts. Musically then, it makes no sense to try
to play what is on the page. From a technical point of view,
the written part is also suspect and problematic. A pianist
could certainly voice all of the chords as written, but
they would be exceedingly difficult to play in a fluent
and idiomatic manner.
There
is also another matter to consider here – namely form. It
is essential for the rhythm section members (as well as
the horn players) to have a basic understanding of the piece's
form. An understanding of this type allows the rhythm section
to play more freely within the context of a big band (i.e.,
incorporating desirable elements of small group improvisation
while at the same time clearly playing all of the composed
elements of the big band score).
Example
1c shows the simple blues-based structure at the heart of
this form. This is made apparent once the embellishing chords
have been removed. (See Example 1c) As before, the detailed
rhythms and chords in these measures are just too much for
the pianist to try to play. However, the example's suggested
piano part is easy to play, and is purposeful (it accentuates
the form) and musically unobtrusive (it does not interfere
with the horn figures).
Chord symbols without rhythmic notation
The presence of chord symbols without rhythmic notation,
may mean that: a) there is an improvised horn solo and the
pianist is to provide improvised chordal accompaniment,
or b) the horns are playing harmonized or unison figures
and the arranger is leaving it to the pianist to determine
where (if anywhere) to play.
In
the first instance, the pianist's task is not easy, but
it is obvious. Basically, he or she must work out voicings
for all of the chords and improvise rhythms. Example 2a,
from Mambo de Memo by Matt Harris, features this
type of notation. Here, the pianist's function is essentially
the same as in a small group where the rhythm section interacts
vigorously with the soloist; the pianist must instantly
change posture and assume the role of a more active participant
than anywhere else in the piece. (See example 2a)
In
the second instance, the pianist's task is much more difficult.
Example 2b, from Rhoda Map by Thad Jones, illustrates
the idea that restraint is required on the pianist's part.
Many inexperienced players simply play too much, and this
detracts from the overall effect of the ensemble. Also,
the horn rhythms are not shown in this example. In the piano
part, Jones merely writes, "comp." It would be a mistake
to simply "comp" freely in this section, as it would conflict
with the horns, and make the texture much too frantic and
busy. (See Example 2b)
How
is it determined what is appropriate in this instance? The
best advice is to have the student listen to the source
recording. If no recording is available, he or she should
obtain stylistically similar recordings (e.g., those of
the Count Basie, Duke Ellington, Stan Kenton, or Maynard
Ferguson bands) and listen intently to what the pianists
play, when they play it, and why they play it (i.e., the
context, musically, of the piano figures). Register and
textural variances should also be noted. In most cases,
it will be found that the pianist does surprisingly little
playing. Furthermore, knowledge of the horn parts is an
important guide. When this knowledge is combined with sound
musical judgment, the resulting piano performance is sure
to be tasteful and idiomatic.
These
are not easy tasks. The pianist is required not only to
improvise voicings and rhythms, but also to compose a part
around the figures played by the ensemble. Beyond the obvious
technical skills needed, this process requires subtlety,
taste, and considerable memorization.
Fully notated parts
Fully notated parts (solo or otherwise) may at first seem
to be those that are the least open to editorial interpretation.
The part may be an actual solo (with or without rhythm section),
a reinforcement of horn figures (for coloristic purposes),
a rhythm section soli, or some combination of the above.
As these parts are completely written out, it is logical
to assume that every note should be played as written. There
are, however, exceptions to this assumption.
Even
when the parts are easy, one might still choose to omit
them. Since the written part in Example 3a, from A Hole
Lot 'A Blues by Jim Martin,6
is very easy, why shouldn't a pianist play them? The part
in question is doubled by all of the saxophones, so the
pitches are not needed. However, when I performed this piece
with the composer, I did not play these measures because
I felt that the percussive quality of the piano detracted
from the sound of the saxophones. With a professional band,
the saxophone section does not need pitch or rhythm cues
of a reinforcement sort. However, with a high school or
college band, these cues may be of assistance. Although
context is very important, musical need – not the score
– is the final arbiter.7
(See Example 3a)
Notice
how much of the written part has been left out. Also, notice
the change of octaves in the part played. This helps it
cut through the ensemble sound and provides a timbral shimmer
the part would otherwise not have. These are decisions made
by the pianist and are not antithetical to the arranger's
intentions. In fact, arrangers expect pianists, and rhythm
section players in general, to treat the parts as guides,
not gospel truth.
In
Example 3b, from Don't Git Sassy by Thad Jones,
we find a moderately difficult part – a composed solo for
two hands that is not doubled in any of the horn parts (in
other words, it really is a "solo," as Jones writes in the
part). It is a statement of the melody in the piano, and
is thematically important because it is the first statement
of the melody of the piece. Thus, it may be assumed that
it has to be played as written. (See Example 3b)
The
problem here is not in the notes themselves. This passage
is not difficult for the average pianist who has achieved
a moderate level of technical proficiency. It becomes more
difficult when we consider the articulations, which are
entirely missing from the score. In order to affect a standard
"long-short" jazz phrasing on the moving eighth-note figures,
the pianist must use a finger legato along with some very
nuanced pedaling. The right hand part is not very tricky
in this regard, as opposed to the left hand part, which
would likely use fingerings of '1-4' moving to '2-5' in
order to connect the two parts of second beat in measure
10 (to say nothing of the movements in measure 11).8
I am quite sure that many readers who have programmed this
piece will remember the disconnected and choppy phrasings
emanating from the pianist during these measures.
As
a means of eliminating any difficulties from the piano part,
I would suggest playing a single-note line in the right
hand with only 3rds and 7ths in the left hand (most of the
left hand part consists of only 3rds and 7ths to begin with).
The right hand part can then be reintroduced once the student
has mastered the easier version. For young or inexperienced
students, or for students with small hands, the large chords
in the right hand may constantly present a problem because
of the repeated octaves and sevenths in the outer pitches.9
The easier version retains all of the harmonic, melodic,
and rhythmic information needed to introduce the theme.
The compromise involves aspects of volume and timbre.
Lastly,
there are examples of difficult piano passages, some of
which are simply accompaniment parts, others of which are
solo features. All but the most advanced students will have
serious problems playing difficult written figures, especially
with proper jazz phrasing and articulation. These concerns
are exacerbated when very fast tempos are considered. Young
students, students with smaller hands, and students without
sufficient technique will strain to play these types of
parts. Therefore, for both musical and technical reasons,
it is best to pare down difficult parts to something more
manageable.
Example
3c illustrates an extremely awkward passage from Tangerine
by Victor Schertzinger. The chord in question falls on the
second eighth-note of the fourth beat in measure 19. The
size of the chord is too large for most hands, and moving
smoothly to the next chord will prove difficult. Here, the
arranger has simply written a piano reduction of the saxophone
part without regard for pianistic technique. (See Example
3c) Solutions to this problem include a) leaving the part
out, or b) playing the bottom note (F#) of the right hand
chord in the left hand, and omitting the bass clef part.
Note
that there are also chords placed in parentheses, without
rhythmic indications. There is no explanation on the score
as to what this means. Perhaps they are suggested voicings
for comping purposes, but without knowledge of the horns'
rhythmic figures, the pianist could easily overplay his
or her part by using these pitches. Once again, a careful
listening to the horns will determine what the pianist should
play.
This
style of notation (i.e., a piano reduction of the horn parts)
can be very difficult to realize, especially when chords
progress quickly or in a syncopated manner. In order to
play with idiomatic phrasing and articulation, both exceptional
finger technique and sophisticated pedal control is needed.
Even then, an accomplished player (such as a high school
pianist with strong technique) will have considerable difficulty
because of the variety of dynamics and articulations present.
Example
3d, from The Kid From Red Bank by Neal Hefti, contains
a challenging piano part. (See Example 3d) In this instance,
the fast tempo of quarter note=280 is the biggest issue.
Any tempo even approaching this brisk speed will be impossible
for players of limited technical skills to play. Even though
the difficulty of the left hand stride pattern is somewhat
mitigated by the lack of right hand movement in measures
77-84, the challenge presented to an average pianist is
enormous. There are several solutions (in order of increasing
severity)10:
a) remove all octave doublings in the left hand (beats 1
and 3) in measures 78-79, and/or b) ignore the "8[vb.]"
directions in the left hand in measures 81-84, and/or c)
move all of the notes on beats 1 and 3 up one or two octaves
so that the left hand does not have to move far on the keyboard.
The
first two solutions maintain some element of the stride
pattern's excitement while the last does not. Another option
would be for the pianist to play only on beats 2 and 4,
while the bassist plays on beats 1 and 3. At this stage,
however, the integrity of the stride pattern is totally
destroyed.
Final thoughts
Most contemporary writers appear to be aware of the above
problems and are writing piano parts that are idiomatic.
However, although the issue may eventually become moot,
it should be remembered that extant libraries in most schools
were started in the 1970s and 1980s. They contain some of
the greatest works ever written for big band, and it is
highly unlikely that this music will be revised to "correct"
each piano part. (I purposefully disparage the term "correct"
because the piano parts do not need "correction." There
is nothing wrong with the parts as written if there is a
seasoned professional on the receiving end; after all, this
is how they were conceived.) The problem is that many of
these charts are being performed today by high school and
college bands. The directors of these groups need to understand
that a literal reading of the score serves no greater good.
Jazz is flexible enough to accommodate an enormous variety
of different skill levels; not only does the music allow
for an individualized reading based upon technical concerns,
it is probably at its most exciting and vibrant when its
participants play within their means.
I
believe that herein lies one of the real strengths of jazz.
It allows for players at even the most basic levels of technical
prowess to express themselves using the technique available
to them. Of course, the level of expression will be severely
limited by the technique available, but this should not
bother us. Jazz accepts beginners on their own terms, capitalizing
on their creative impulse, as opposed to their technical
prowess.
As
educators, we need to remember that we are introducing new
generations to this music and its unique methodology. We
should therefore not ask for or imply a "classical" reading
of jazz scores. That model is appropriate within its own
style, but is inappropriate within a jazz setting.
Endnotes
Improvised
solos, in general, have received more pedagogical coverage
than any other issue in jazz; they are also beyond the
scope of this article and are not discussed here.
Whether
or not one should play every figure is another matter
that is discussed throughout this article.
I
have shown a possible interpretation underneath the examples,
but these are certainly not in any way meant to be definitive
– merely one option that I think complements the overall
effect.
Thad
Jones is one of the greatest and most inventive minds
in the history of big band writing. His music is still
very popular today, largely because of blues and gospel
inflections, the unabashedly "danceable" qualities in
many of his works, and the eminently "swinging" nature
of his compositions, yet there is another level at work
here; he is the master of harmonic variation. In particular,
his use of reharmonization and embellishing techniques
is astounding in both variety and creativity. That which
often seems stodgy and pretentiously academic in a lesser
talent appears seamless, spontaneous, and unbelievably
tuneful from Jones' pen. In a word, Thad Jones' library
is truly a lexicon of jazz theory and harmony, as is the
case with this piece.
I
have seen many charts where pianists have left hand-written
directions in this regard. For example, embellishing chords
have been crossed out or placed in parentheses, leaving
the relatively simple structures (blues, rhythm changes,
etc.) clearly visible and easily recognizable.
I
performed this piece with the composer and asked him directly
about the piano part. His response is reflected in the
interpretation given.
This
fingering is awkward and difficult to play with proper
articulation.
Octave
work can be difficult and has potential for injury. Pedagogically
speaking, octave work is generally not introduced until
a moderately advanced degree of technique has been achieved
and until hand size is large enough to easily span the
interval.
Of
course, the tempo could be slowed, but it would need to
be slowed considerably, thus drastically compromising
the piece.
Kurt Ellenberger
began composing and performing as a teenager
in his hometown of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. His first
CD for Challenge-A Records, titled Songs From Far
West, was received with great acclaim in Canada,
Europe, and the United States, and has been followed
by a solo recording titled Quadrants, and A
Tale of Three Cities, a duo recording with internationally-renowned
saxophonist and composer, David Renter. As a multi-instrumentalist
(trumpet/piano) Ellenberger has performed with artists
such as Kenny Wheeler, Danny Gottlieb, Carl Allen, Dick
Lowenthal, and Billy Eckstine, as well as with symphony
orchestras in Canada and the United States. He has been
featured on CBC Radio (Canada) and NPR (USA) as both
performer and composer.
Ellenberger
is an ASCAP award-winning composer whose contemporary, classical
and third stream works include music for piano, voice, choir,
orchestra, brass quintet, trumpet ensemble, brass choir,
strings and two concertos. He is also a published theorist
and the author of an improvisation text titled Materials
and Concepts in Jazz Improvisation. He holds a doctorate
in music composition from the University of Texas at Austin,
and is currently the director of jazz studies at Grand Valley
State University (Allendale, MI) where he teaches improvisation,
composition, and theory.
Want to pay for
a chart by check or money order? Send payment to:
Jim Martin, c/o TelCon, 2215 Oak Industrial Dr. NE, Grand
Rapids, MI 49505