On Composing Jazz
“Jazz composition” is something of an oxymoron, because jazz is frequently thought of as being primarily an improvised art form. True as this may be in people’s minds and hearts, it is first the establishment of a tune, song, arrangement or other composed structure that provides the musical setting for that improvisation to flourish. The great improvisers in jazz history have almost always played within the context of a composed structure, and the tension between their improvisations and the repeated structure of the song’s form, harmony and rhythm is what creates the excitement of a jazz performance.
What makes a jazz composition different from a classical, or other set piece, is that it provides the opportunity for soloist(s) to improvise over the composition. Customarily the song form is continually repeated, minus the original melody, and the soloist then creates a new melody over the harmony, rhythm, or other structure suggested by the composition.
But what process does a “jazz” composer go through, to create the piece for the improviser to shine?
Surprisingly, whether the composer starts with a snippet of a melody, a riff, or a harmony, chord progression, bass line or figure, most of those ideas come from improvisation! The composer most often comes up with an idea by playing something – improvising – on their instrument. This is probably common to all composers of all musical traditions.
What kinds of “jazz” compositions do we have? The answer in 2021 is: many! It should be said that a jazz performance can be based on practically any type of song, from nursery rhymes to classical symphonies. I once heard the great Cuban trumpeter Arturo Sandoval blowing on the changes of “The Internationale,” an unusual piece to play jazz over because of it’s choral, classical nature. Jazz artists have covered songs from all styles and all eras.
Starting Points
A jazz composer starting from scratch has to take many things into consideration. The traditional starting points (and probably most utilized) have been the Blues and/or Rhythm Changes – two pillars of jazz improvisation whose simplicity has given rise to nearly infinite possibilities of new melodies.
What makes a composition “original” lies in how new and distinct the melody being composed is. I frequently remark that no two melodies are alike; no two songs are identical. Usually the melody is what sets them apart and makes them recognizable. The vast number of standard songs from Broadway and films available to most jazz musicians goes to illustrate this point.
A composer can utilize the traditional harmonic underpinnings of blues, rhythm or standard song, and then compose/arrange new melodies over the top of them. This technique was most notably used during the bebop period, and I still use it today, especially when I find a unique harmony or form from an old standard song.
After the bebop years, composers began developing and using alternate or substitute chord changes – thereby altering the bass lines, the topmost melodies and the patterns for improvisation. The development of harmony, melody and (ultimately) of form led the way to the progressive jazz movement of the 1960s – the compositions of Miles Davis, Wayne Shorter, Herbie Hancock and the like.
One can use substitute harmonies to reinforce and reiterate the original structures of the blues or rhythm changes (keeping them as 12- or 32-bar structures). One can delve into the immense library of other composers’ works by re-harmonizing standard songs. Composers are born tinkerers – we enjoy playing around with notes, harmonies, melodies and rhythms in order to create something new. The primary impetus of the jazz composer is to be original, to create something brand new, even while drawing on styles and forms previously established.
When I compose, I always try to achieve something new with the basic musical elements: melody, rhythm, harmony and form. I try to compose a piece from initial ideas, exploring the logical extension and development of those ideas. For example, a melodic trope might be varied in conjunction with an altered chord progression. Or a simple melody can be re-harmonized with powerful effect.
Jazz has traditionally been built over the swing 4/4 feel, and, as an underlying background, Swing has lent itself to free-flowing improvisations by soloists, chorus after chorus. Swing is an extremely discursive feel, and has given rise to and helped develop the great jazz improvisers in history. But as we know, swing is not the only feel in jazz today. Rhythmic feel might also be Latin, Rock, or world beat – in any meter, tempo, or number of bars.
Questions of Style
A jazz composer has to be thoroughly familiar with multiple jazz styles, composers and histories in order to parse out the elements that go into making up an original composition. These are the elements the composer must work with.
Blues and gospel, ragtime, New Orleans music (whew! so much there!) early swing, middle swing, late swing, progressive, cool, modal, free, Latin jazz (Cuban, Brazilian), fusion, free jazz. No serious discussion of jazz composing can proceed without serious consideration of style: what style are you trying to compose in? Which jazz tradition are you trying to add to, augment, and possibly even move forward with your efforts?
Blending of styles is also a possibility, even though this can sometimes result in oddly defined composition. At other times, a new vibrant style can emerge, as in Cubop or Fusion. It takes a lot of careful and analytic listening to figure out what makes Duke Ellington himself, Wayne Shorter, Chick Corea, Charlie Parker, Ornette Coleman, Tom Jobim, etc. What are the distinctive elements of their styles? Again, think of the basic elements: melody, rhythm, harmony and form. By doing some of this research and development, composers can effectively place themselves in the wide stream of jazz history.
When one truly understands stylistic elements - for example, bebop melody and rhythm - one can start to make decisions about one’s own work. Is what I’ve written stylistically in the same ballpark as a given artist? Can I say that I am contributing, and even bettering, that musical tradition?
Personally, I seek to compose musical pieces that a) have a relationship to older jazz styles (however hidden and abstract that might be); b) are good vehicles for improvisation (and even can improve and upgrade the level of improvisation of the performer); and c) can be easily identified by listeners as having coming from a traditional place, yet going to somewhere new.
I certainly don’t leave listeners out of the process, even if it’s probable that they sometimes might not hear the subtle processes by which I have expanded the tradition. The concept of my trio, since we started playing together in 2013, has been first, to play mostly original compositions. Second, we try to make them sound like they’ve been around for years yet offer something distinctly new in each piece.
Ultimately, being a good composer means being true to oneself. Through the years I’ve been actively composing jazz – more than 50 years at last count -- I have written credible sambas (though I’m not Brazilian), credible Afro-Cuban mambos and boleros (though I’m neither Afro nor Cuban), credible bebop (though I didn’t live in NYC during the 40s and 50s). This has been possible through intense, analytical listening, and because I made serious study of jazz performers, composers, and styles. To all of this, I’ve added my own personal emotional and intellectual developments and understandings, in order to push the music forward in whatever way I can. For me, composing is an ongoing process. It promotes passionate exploration and respectful contributions to the world of jazz.
