an analysis of dave holland’s free improvisation in
TRANSCRIPT
APPROVED: Lynn Seaton, Major Professor David Bard-Schwarz, Committee Member John P. Murphy, Committee Member Rob Parton, Interim Chair of the Division of
Jazz Studies Felix Olschofka, Director of Graduate Studies in
the College of Music John Richmond, Dean of the College of Music Victor Prybutok, Dean of the Toulouse Graduate
School
AN ANALYSIS OF DAVE HOLLAND’S FREE IMPROVISATION IN “WATERFALL”
AND ITS PEDAGOGICAL APPLICATIONS FOR BASSISTS IN
AVANT-GARDE PERFORMANCE
Steven Heffner, B.M., M.A.
Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS
December 2019
Heffner, Steven. An Analysis of Dave Holland’s Free Improvisation in “Waterfall” and
Its Pedagogical Applications for Bassists in Avant-Garde Performance. Doctor of Musical Arts
(Performance), December 2019, 69 pp., 2 tables, 25 figures, 4 musical examples, bibliography,
38 titles, discography, 11 titles.
This research investigates a microcosm of the free jazz/free improvisation environment of
the 1970s in “Waterfall,” from the album Dave Holland/Sam Rivers Vol. 1. This recording
features Dave Holland and Sam Rivers exhibiting highly developed improvisational language
and effortless interaction. The purpose of this investigation is to create pedagogical material for
bassists who are unfamiliar and/or uncomfortable with performing in an improvisational style
that exists separately from the rigid, instrumental role hierarchy of common practice jazz. An
analysis of musical elements including melody, rhythm, form, and energy through systems of
musical contour, musical forces, and form analysis reveal constituent patterns that can be
isolated. These patterns are codified and presented as pedagogical suggestions to assist in the
practice of free improvisation.
ii
Copyright 2019
by
Steven Heffner
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my dissertation committee: Lynn Seaton, Dr. David Bard-Schwarz,
and Dr. John Murphy. Your participation was instrumental, and this research is better for it.
Special thanks to Dr. Matthew James for his work on the Sam Rivers transcription and his
encouragement to pursue this degree. My interest in this research was sowed long ago in vibrant
collaborations with extraordinary musicians, including Dr. Sean Parsons, Dr. Don Goodwin, and
Dru Heller. Thanks also goes to Rob Tapper and Todd DelGiudice for their pedagogy and
patience.
A very special thanks goes to Carol Goss and Improvising Artists Records & Video for
the use of their published and copyrighted material.
And finally, thank you Dave Holland for your riveting performance with Sam Rivers. All
your music has been an inspiration to me.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES .............................................................................................. viii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2. STATE OF RESEARCH ......................................................................................... 7
Method .............................................................................................................................. 10
CHAPTER 3. “WATERFALL” – MELODY .............................................................................. 11
CHAPTER 4. “WATERFALL” ANALYSIS – RHYTHM ......................................................... 21
CHAPTER 5. “WATERFALL” ANALYSIS – FORM ............................................................... 33
CHAPTER 6. “WATERFALL ANALYSIS” – ENERGY........................................................... 41
CHAPTER 7. PEDAGOGICAL SUGGESTIONS....................................................................... 52
General Considerations ..................................................................................................... 60
CHAPTER 8. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................... 62
Areas of Further Study ...................................................................................................... 62
BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 66
DISCOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................................... 69
v
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 5.1: Sections of “Waterfall.” ............................................................................................... 35
Table 7.1: Section A1, A2, and C energy comparison table. ........................................................ 59
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 3.1: Marked pitches 0:00–0:55. ......................................................................................... 12
Figure 3.2: Marked B-natural at formal section............................................................................ 13
Figure 3.3: Contour Segments in 2:12–2:19. ................................................................................ 15
Figure 3.4: Contour similarities of CSEG C, D. ........................................................................... 15
Figure 3.5: Melodic Contour responses from Holland. ................................................................ 16
Figure 3.6: CSEG Y as retrograde inversion of CSEG Z. ............................................................ 16
Figure 3.7: Ambiguity through denial of octave division 1-5-8. ................................................. 18
Figure 3.8: Intra-phrase relationship: question-answer. ............................................................... 19
Figure 3.9: Development model with repetition. .......................................................................... 19
Figure 3.10: Development model without exact repetition. ......................................................... 20
Figure 4.1: Rhythmic Interaction: Transition/Transformation at 3:58. ........................................ 23
Figure 4.2: Rhythmic Interaction: Transition/Transformation at 3:36. ........................................ 24
Figure 4.3: Voice leading of melodic line anchoring rhythmic development. ............................. 24
Figure 4.4: Fabricated DSEG F. ................................................................................................... 25
Figure 4.5: Inversion of DSEG “same-contour” imitation. .......................................................... 26
Figure 4.6: Durational compression of DSEG contours. .............................................................. 27
Figure 4.7: DSEG (X, Y, Z) simplification. ................................................................................. 27
Figure 4.8: Rhythmic inertia. ........................................................................................................ 29
Figure 4.9: Metrical Perception of rhythmic inertia excerpts. ...................................................... 31
Figure 5.1: Graphical representation of form in “Waterfall.” ....................................................... 38
Figure 5.2: Transcription of the beginning and ending of Waterfall. ........................................... 39
Figure 6.1: Bass part transcription of section A1. ........................................................................ 45
Figure 6.2: Bass part transcription section G. ............................................................................... 48
vii
Figure 6.3: Bass part transcription of section K2. ........................................................................ 50
Figure 7.1: Relationship between practice components. .............................................................. 53
viii
LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES
Page
Example 7.1: Marked pitches and fluency. ................................................................................... 54
Example 7.2: Possible fingering of Question-Answer example. ................................................. 55
Example 7.3: Examples of metrical ambiguity ............................................................................. 57
Example 7.4: Groupings of two and three eighth notes. ............................................................... 57
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this document is to analyze Dave Holland’s performance on “Waterfall”
from the album Dave Holland/Sam Rivers Vol. 11 with the goal of identifying organizational
features in his approach to free improvisation. These observations will form the basis of
pedagogical suggestions for bassists to become comfortable with avant-garde jazz. This study
analyzes components of melody, rhythm, form, and energy in “Waterfall” with a focus on Dave
Holland’s improvisational procedures that occur in the context of performance with Sam Rivers.
Due to difficulties inherent in the analysis of free improvisation, Dave Holland/Sam
Rivers Vol. 1 provides two explicit benefits. First, bass transcription on older, lower fidelity
recordings creates unique challenges when trying to identify pitches, articulations, and rhythmic
intricacies. These miniscule details can also be defining characteristics.2 The addition of other
instruments including drums, piano, or guitar can mask typical bass frequencies making accuracy
challenging. The first track, “Waterfall”, features Sam Rivers playing soprano saxophone which
offers less interference in the frequency range of the bass. These mitigating factors allow for
higher accuracy of transcription. The second reason is the interactive clarity that comes from
only two musicians improvising together. Motifs woven between two musicians are easier to
perceive. Tracking the origination and development of motives is also more direct because of the
ensemble size.
1 Dave Holland/Sam Rivers Vol 1., recorded on February 18, 1976, master number 28225, released on Improvising Artists Inc. 373843. 2 Consider the re-articulation of the same note in a different place to allow for subtle pitch deviations. This effect may be used in structured and free improvisation environments.
2
Dave Holland recorded with Miles Davis for two tracks on Filles de Kilimanjaro3 and
was a member of the quintet, later dubbed the “Lost Quintet,”4 from July 1968 until September
1970. He recorded his first album as leader entitled Conference of the Birds5 in 1972 with Sam
Rivers, Anthony Braxton, and Barry Altschul. Since then, Holland has appeared on over 170
albums with jazz legends and young talent alike. Holland’s achievements were recognized by the
National Endowment for the Arts in 2017 when he was awarded the NEA Jazz Masters
Fellowship. Though his popularity and success make him renowned among a jazz audience, the
recordings from his free period have been largely absent from the scholarly conversation and
commercial consumption. Holland is representative of the next generation of free jazz musicians,
influenced by free jazz recordings from the 1950s and 1960s.6 Holland also offers a unique
artistic perspective given his association with Davis during his transition toward the electric
period.
Dave Holland and Sam Rivers worked together in a variety of configurations including
Barry Altschul on Rivers’s trio albums Sizzle7 and The Quest8 or as the duo. When his free
improvisations during the 1970s with Sam Rivers were mentioned in an interview, Holland
replied:
…It was all open-form improvising. But we did it for eight or nine years. It got to a point where I think a lot of people couldn't tell whether there was written material or not. Because the language and communication that we built up over that time was very clear, I
3 Filles de Kilimanjaro, Miles David, Columbia, recorded on June 19–21 and September 24, 1968, compact disc. 4 The term “Lost Quintet” was first applied in an article by Peter Keepnews. 5 Conference of the Birds, Dave Holland, ECM 1027,1972, reissued 2000, CD. 6 Dave Roberts, “Dave Holland: A Weekend of Bass,” All About Jazz, Michael Ricci, 1 May 2001, www.allaboutjazz.com/dave-holland-a-weekend-of-bass-dave-holland-by-dave-roberts.php?page=1. 7 Sizzle, Sam Rivers, Impulse! ASD 9316, 1975, Apple Music. 8 The Quest, Sam Rivers, Red Record VPA 106, 1976, Apple Music.
3
think. At times it sounded like it was written. Things would happen, events would happen that sounded like they were planned or written out.9
This duo presents a mature pair of free improvisors with a burgeoning language and highly
communicative interactions from which to begin an analysis of Holland’s style in free
improvisation.
In common practice jazz, a popular song or composition is treated as a vehicle for
improvisation. The process of improvisation during solo sections may find inspiration through
further manipulations, variations, and developments of the song’s stated melody. This contrasts
with “Waterfall” which does have a compositional reference and, therefore, lacks the
expectations of melody and harmony. A functional definition of melody in this research is any
melodic gesture, forming, or structure.10
The absence of melodic and harmonic expectations also has implications for traditional
instrumental roles in free improvisation performance. In common practice jazz, the bass is
hierarchically placed as a support instrument. Walking bass lines or two-feel patterns are
expected and function to support melodic, harmonic, and rhythmic functions in the ensemble.
Musical interactions between instruments without role expectations create a heterarchical
space.11 A clear juxtaposition of these relationships can be heard on the recording of “Waterfall”
from 3:05–5:06. The duo presents a generally hierarchical structure where the soprano
saxophone features a more rhythmically active melody and the bass, while being interactive,
9 Dave Roberts, “Dave Holland: A Weekend of Bass,” All About Jazz, Michael Ricci, 1 May 2001, www.allaboutjazz.com/dave-holland-a-weekend-of-bass-dave-holland-by-dave-roberts.php?page=1. 10 Melody no longer refers to a rigid set of pitches with implied harmonic accompaniment and cultural meaning in the case of “Waterfall,” but broadly as melodic phrases entwined between soprano saxophone and double bass. Linguistically, it may be thought of as Melody→melody. 11 Heterarchy and hierarchy are not mutually exclusive. Hierarchical organization and be subsumed in more complex heterarchical systems.
4
features supportive roles like walking or broken time from 3:05 to 3:50. Around 4:00–5:06, the
relationship becomes hierarchical with similar levels of rhythmic and melodic activity being
expressed by both performers.12 The prominence of the saxophone role is replaced by equality
between the instruments. The heterarchical relationship, the drastic range difference between
bass and soprano saxophone, and abandonment of typical song structure means that melody may
be present in either voice or both voices at once.13 “Waterfall,” features moments that appear
heterarchical at times and hierarchical at others which reflects a dynamic, improvisational
relationship.
Rhythm is a powerful means of communication and motivic development between
improvisors. In the case of melody, the rhythms in which a collection of notes are played can be
a vector of improvisational development. This rhythmic analysis is primarily concerned with
local relationships of durations and groupings of notes with attention given to how the group
members manipulate them individually and collectively. When improvisors “agree” to different
rhythmic durations, different metrical groupings, or consistent/inconsistent tempos, these shifts
can be used to interpret larger formal structures.
In free improvisation, form may arise from changes in melody, rhythm, and/or energy
which crystalize into a perceptible and unifying section. In the case of “Waterfall,” sections arise
through a combination of adjustments, particularly through timbre, tempo, meter, and/or
assuming idiomatic roles. Free jazz and avant-garde performance have no formal expectations,
12 Other hierarchical moments include 9:11-9:54 and 8:20-9:12. Other heterarchical moments include 6:31-8:21 and 5:06-5:32. 13 Western music is often composed or improvised in a hierarchical manner. Phrases like “melody is king” or “bring out that motive” or “don’t cover the alto part” imply tiers of importance between instruments or parts. Often, roles are implied (or expected) by the nature of the instrument. The typical role of the bassist is to provide a harmonic and rhythmic foundation within expected parameters. Free improvisation does not necessarily exist in a hierarchical relationship nor does it take kindly to expectations due to its radical freedom.
5
but the free improvisation between Dave Holland and Sam Rivers frequently coalesce into
related sections in a larger formal structure.
Energy includes some constituent variables from melody and rhythm, but also includes
these in combinations with other variables including dynamics and timbres. In writing about
Cecil Taylor’s music, Jost describes energy like this:
Energy is not equivalent to intensity (measured in decibels), as some of my jazz practitioner countrymen, champions of misunderstood freedom in jazz, often assume. Energy is, more than anything else, a variable of time. It creates motion or results from motion; it means a process in which the dynamic level is just one variable, and by no means a constant.14
While Jost is willing to assert specific constituents of energy, Grahm Lock uses the term
“energy” to describe the styles Cecil Taylor, Albert Ayler, and John Coltrane with phrases like
“tenor-cries” and “molten arpeggios.”15 These instances are insightful, but do not provide a clear
defining characteristic of energy.
Energy incorporates a wide range of musical variables including tempo (impulse density),
dynamics, timbre, and pitch. These forces are positivistic in nature and create energy even if only
some constituents reach a certain threshold of perception. The examples provided by Dave
Holland and Sam Rivers show controlled energy generation and reactions to those energy
variables. The category of energy is unique due to the broad nature of variables and the
subjective nature of perception.
The absence of traditional harmonic guidelines in free improvisation will make the
pedagogical suggestions different than other, more typical pedagogical aids. Pedagogical
resources for bassists are primarily centered around technical exercises, patterns, scales, theory,
14 Ekkehard Jost. Free Jazz. New York: De Capo Press, 1974, 69. 15 Graham Lock, Forces in motion: Anthony Braxton and the meta-reality of creative music: interviews and tour notes, England 1985, Courier Dover Publications, 2018.
6
and/or styles. The role of the bass is strongly associated with a rhythmic/harmonic paradigm and
the removal of this structure makes pedagogical material less popular. My research aims to
provide pedagogical strategies derived from Dave Holland’s improvisations and interactions that
can aid bassists who are uncomfortable outside of traditional rhythm section roles.
7
CHAPTER 2
STATE OF RESEARCH
Ekkehard Jost’s book entitled Free Jazz is the seminal analytical writing on the “The
New Thing.”16 It includes style portraits of influential free jazz artists including Charles Mingus,
Ornette Coleman, John Coltrane, Cecil Taylor, Archie Shepp, and others using a variety of
analytical methods including electro-acoustic graphs, visual representations of sonic events, and
transcription. Each portrait includes analysis of social, historiographical, and musical
characteristics of the artist. In her dissertation “Analyzing Free Jazz,” Lynette Westendorf
discusses Ornette Coleman’s “Lonely Woman”, John Coltrane’s “India”, and Cecil Taylor’s
Indent – “Second Layer” from a self-described perspective of an artist.17 The analyses contained
are narrower than Jost’s and exemplify a more focused analysis. Keith Waters also pursues a
comprehensive analysis of the music of Davis’ second great quintet in Studio Recordings of
Miles Davis: 1965–68, which, among other things, explores the erosions between structured jazz
and free jazz that occurred through the recording evolution of the group.18 Through
transcriptions, Schenkerian graphs, mapping, and tables, Waters creates a convincing analytical
narrative of their artistic progression.
Three other comparable dissertations include Larry Ousley’s “Solo Techniques for
Unaccompanied Pizzicato Jazz Double Bass”19, Robert Bowen’s “Function and Meaning in
16 Ekkehard Jost. Free Jazz. New York: De Capo Press, 1974. 17 Lynette Westendorf, "Analyzing Free Jazz" Order No. 9504701, University of Washington, 1994. 18 Keith Waters, The Studio Recordings of the Miles Davis Quintet, 1965-68. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. 19 Larry James Ousley, Jr. "Solo Techniques for Unaccompanied Pizzicato Jazz Double Bass," Order No. 3306737, University of Miami, 2008. Page 5.
8
Reprise”20, and Robert Sabin’s “Gary Peacock: Analysis of Progressive Double Bass
Improvisation 1963–1965”21. Larry Ousley notes that “published repertoire for unaccompanied
jazz double bass is virtually non-existent,” and “pedagogical and instructional materials are also
insufficient.” He provides an extensive list of pedagogical materials for the instrument in his
dissertation, some of which may have technical uses in the idiom of free improvisation, but none
contain meaningful guides to free improvisation.22 He creates his own pedagogical framework
that includes chapters on Double Stop, Single-Note Accompaniment, and Harmonics with
technical and theoretical explanations. Demonstrative recordings, solos, original arrangements,
and transcriptions are present to show validity.
In Bowen’s “Function and Meaning in Reprise,” the author seeks further meaning in the
head-solo-head (AXA) form that dominates the jazz performance tradition. Through three case
studies (Miles Davis’s album In a Silent Way, Debussy’s Gigues, and Dave Holland’s
composition “Prime Directive”), Bowen seeks to determine justification for reprise in his aptly-
termed “reprise reflex” conundrum. While he claims design similarity between Davis’ “It’s
About that Time” and Holland’s “Prime Directive”, it may be that Dave Holland proves a
convenient thread between two approaches to the AXA form of his content.
Robert Sabin’s dissertation, “Gary Peacock: Analysis of Progressive Double Bass
Improvisation 1963–1965” illustrates a compelling picture of Gary Peacock’s artistic output
20 Robert Eric Bowen. "Function and Meaning in Reprise." Order No. 3021965, Princeton University, 2001. 21 Robert W Sabin. "Gary Peacock: Analysis of Progressive Double Bass Improvisation 1963-1965." Order No. 3682319, New York University, 2015. 22 Larry James Ousley, Jr. "Solo Techniques for Unaccompanied Pizzicato Jazz Double Bass," Order No. 3306737, University of Miami, 2008.
9
throughout the 60s as a bass player and collaborator. Sabin23 draws specific, innovative criteria
that Gary Peacock exemplifies in the performances during this period from sources compiled
from Hodson24, Litweiler25, Bley26, and Jost27. Gary Peacock recorded with Bill Evans and
Albert Ayler during this period which requires a comprehensive analytical framework that can
illustrate his techniques in tonal and non-tonal contexts; Sabin uses a mixed-methods
investigation relying on formal musical analysis in addition to “an ethnographic inquiry
consisting of interviews conducted with Gary Peacock”.28
My research differs from the formerly mentioned research in these three ways: First,
Dave Holland’s years of activity as a leader/co-leader began in the 1970s, after his period with
Miles Davis, and after the first wave of free jazz artists of the 1960s. The decade brought
significant changes to avant-garde accessibility with the move towards jazz fusion, the growing
loft-scene of New York, and business changes29 in record labels. Second, my research is
concerned with analytical categories of melody, rhythm, form, and energy from Holland’s
performance with Sam Rivers. The duo setting enables the listener to easily identify melodic,
rhythmic, and/or energetic relationships between two freely improvised parts. Third, this
research is also pedagogical in nature, oriented towards bassists where a departure from
23 Robert W Sabin. "Gary Peacock: Analysis of Progressive Double Bass Improvisation 1963-1965." Order No. 3682319, New York University, 2015, pages 4-5. 24 Robert Hodson. Interaction, Improvisation, and Interplay in Jazz. 1st ed. Routledge,
2007. Print. 25 John Litweiler. Ornette Coleman. Da Capo Press, 1994. Print. 26 Paul Bley and David Lee. Stopping time: Paul Bley and the transformation of jazz. Véhicule Press, 1999. 27 Ekkehard Jost. Free Jazz. New York: De Capo Press, 1974. 28 Sabin, 7. 29 John G Rodwan. "Sam Rivers: Remembering the Forgotten." African American Review 47, no. 4 (2014): 530.
10
structured traditional roles leaves the bassist vulnerable to the demands of free improvisation.
My analysis of the “Waterfall” on Dave Holland/Sam Rivers Vol. 1 builds on previous
ethnographic and musical analyses of free jazz to create a pedagogical guide specific to the bass.
Method
Music analysis is limited to “Waterfall” on Dave Holland/Sam Rivers Vol. 1 and analyzed
through systems including common practice jazz theory30, George Russell’s Lydian Chromatic
Concept of Tonal Organization31, pitch-class set transformations32, and musical forces.33
Analysis of melodic, rhythmic, formal and energetic dimensions employed by the ensemble
reveal practical strategies for group interaction with focus on Dave Holland’s improvisational
decisions and roles. These strategies are then distilled into a pedagogical guide oriented towards
jazz bassists using examples from the transcription and generated exercises. Generalized research
about instructional philosophy is included to frame the pedagogical content within the learning
environment.
30 Mark Levine. The Jazz Theory Book. Petaluma, CA: Sher Music, 1995. 31 George Russell, George Russell’s Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization (Brookline, MA: Concept Pub., 2008). 32 Steven Block. "Pitch-Class Transformation in Free Jazz." Music Theory Spectrum 12, no. 2 (1990): 181-202. 33 Larson, Steve. “Musical Forces, Melodic Expectation, and Jazz Melody.” Music Perception 19/iii (2002): 351-385.
11
CHAPTER 3
“WATERFALL” – MELODY
The free improvisation between Dave Holland and Sam Rivers features melodic elements
that have implied meanings, familiar to the seasoned duo, and appear to direct the
improvisational experience with precision that defies the “free improvisation” moniker. Marked
pitches, melodic contour, and intra-phrase relationships constitute these melodic elements; they
can be simultaneously operative in improvisation. The way Dave Holland manipulates these
variables can provide insights into how bassists may approach melody in their own free
improvisations.
There is no evidence of a traditional tonal hierarchy or prevailing tonic in “Waterfall”
despite some sections having a tonal nature; however, Ekkehard Jost suggests the concept of
“tonal center” in his style portrait of Ornette Coleman by saying, “…tonality does not necessarily
involve functional harmonic progressions; rather, it implies first and foremost a relationship to
one tone.”34 In his example of Coleman’s solo on “Tears Inside,” Jost’s comments may be
implied as a broad modal explanation for the melodic material in the solo. This statement also
strongly resonates with Russell’s tenets of tonal unity and his ideas of vertical-horizontal melody
in relationship to the prevailing “Lydian Tonic.”35 The improvisational setting of “Tears Inside”
is different than that of “Waterfall,” because Percy Heath and Shelly Manne delineate a clear 12-
measure blues form with the corresponding cadences and interior structure. They continue to
play a traditional treatment of the form while Ornette Coleman’s solo maintains a long-term goal
of Db as it weaves in and out of the expectation of the changes commonly associated with the
34 Jost, 48. 35 George Russell, George Russell’s Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization, 4th Edition, Vol. 1, Brookline, MA: Concept Publishing Company., 2008, page 8-9.
12
blues. This divorce between Ornette’s solo and his accompaniment, a not altogether unfamiliar
theme of early free jazz recordings, makes the concept of “tonal center” a fundamental unifying
principal in the solo-accompaniment relationship. “Waterfall” is free improvisation that has
neither formal nor cadential expectation, instead, it is derived from the collective decisions of
two experienced improvisers familiar with the other’s nuanced vocabulary and syntax.
Figure 3.1: Marked pitches 0:00–0:55.
Dave Holland’s opening melody (Figure 3.1–0:02) starts on a B2, which marks the
beginning of a free counterpoint section. At the beginning, they interact with contrary motion
and stepwise motion or small leaps. At 0:24, both parts arrive at a two octave B3/B1 which
serves to close their first counterpoint statement. Pitch class B begins to have a longer term
13
meaning as the piece progresses with its placement at the end of Holland’s phrase at 0:35 and,
more strikingly, at 0:49.5. The emergence of B2 at the latter timestamp coincides with an answer
from Rivers (D4–E4) with a rhythm that is identical to the opening melodic counterpoint of the
piece.36 This imitation is immediately discarded as both improvisers move away from the
marked moment. Holland ends this arco section with pitches [B2,Bb2,F2] and holds a B2 before
switching to pizzicato as illustrated in Figure 3.2.
Figure 3.2: Marked B-natural at formal section.
Jost’s “tonal center” is an inappropriate concept in the free improvisation of “Waterfall”
due to the tonal environment from which it was conceived, but the treatment of B-natural does
make a case for a new term: marked pitch.37 The term marked pitch38 does not convey tonal
weight or gravity, but it implies deeper structural and/or long-range meaning; the pitch is
typically made evident when ascribed a long duration and/or when it appears at a significant
point. This pitch resurfaces in a noteworthy fashion with relative frequency. Through the process
of improvisation, this pitch appears uniquely as both a short-term goal and a
structural/compositional support for the performance. This overt manifestation of B2 at the
beginning is the starting point of the improvisation and the performers attach significance to this
pitch through duration, repetition, and its appearance at phrase endings. The marked significance
36 The opening soprano melody was an octave up: D5-E5. 37 “Tears Inside” is a blues in the key of Db. The blues implies both formal and harmonic structure which is absent from “Waterfall.” 38 Robert Hatten has a well-developed definition of markedness. Marked pitch has some specific implications to the way I hear “Waterfall,” but there are some semiotic similarities.
14
of B continues through the beginning of the piece and begins to diminish in significance as the
saxophone solo nears at 5:38. Despite reduced significance through the middle of the piece, it
also reappears in the very last held note in the saxophone.
Melodic contour is a melodic element used individually and collectively between
musicians. Elizabeth Martin’s 1988 dissertation on musical contour pursues the question of
perception of pitch-class and set-class.39 Marvin proposed that “abstract theories of pitch – and
set-class structures” are not reflective of the listeners musical experience.40 Contour segments
“recognize the fact that listeners may perceive similarity or equivalence among contours of two
phrases quite apart from accurately recognizing pitch-class or intervallic relationships between
them.”41 She examines a variety of musical contexts and their relationship to cognitive strategies
of listeners from research in the field of cognitive psychology. The evidence that contour is
easily perceived regardless of musical expertise level may also indicate an ease of accessibility in
the mental load being used when improvising.42 This intuition is indicated in Jeff Pressing’s
research which assigns lower cognitive strength scores for contour and significantly higher
cognitive strength scores for trichord sets.43 I hear the use similar44 contours in the interaction
between Holland and Rivers. 45 Figure 3.3 illustrates my interpretation of CSEG interaction
39Elizabeth West Marvin, "A generalized theory of musical contour: its application to melodic and rhythmic analysis of non-tonal music and its perceptual and pedagogical implications." PhD diss., University of Rochester, 1988, page 9. 40 Marvin, 228. 41 Marvin, 66. 42 Marvin, 202. 43 Strength in this case refers to greater amounts of necessary mental processing and mental processing is understood as a scarce resource. 44 Similarity in the context of this research is unrelated to the contour similarity (CSIM) research that Marvin details. 45 Jeff Pressing, “Improvisation: methods and models,” in Generative processes in music: the psychology of performance, improvisation, and composition, ed. John Sloboda (Oxford England: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 156.
15
being used to influence the melodic content of River’s improvisation from 2:11–2:19.
Figure 3.3: Contour Segments in 2:12–2:19.
In the case of Figure 3.3, Dave Holland plays a melodic line during a rhythmically free
section, notated in the bass staff. Sam Rivers responds to each bass melodic statement with his
own melodic material which may be divided into two sections. The antecedent half of each
melody starts with nearly identical chromatic material and the consequent half ends with
contours that echo what was most recently played by Holland. CSEG (C, D) similarities are
shown in Figure 3.4 by simple contour. From the preceding CSEG integer to the proceeding
CSEG integer, a plus (+) indicates an ascent in contour while a minus (-) indicates a descent. It is
likely that the relationship presented in figure 3.5 is most easily perceived in free improvisation.
Figure 3.4: Contour similarities of CSEG C, D.
16
Conversely, there are also times where Holland responds with statements whose contours
can be traced to melodies from Sam Rivers. In both examples, some pitches are repeated but, the
clear differences dismiss simple mimicry. For instance, Figure 3.5 demonstrates Holland’s use of
similar (CSEG W, X) and contrary (CSEG Y, Z) contour to respond and develop his own
melodic content with input from Rivers. CSEG (Y, Z) is notable due to its reverse contour
(CSEG Y [- + +] vs CSEG Z [+ + -]) and related through retrograde inversion as seen in figure
3.6.46 The pitch content shows Rivers emphasizing a C#5–A5 outer limit while Holland plays the
A pitch-class at A2 but puts emphasis on C2. This clash of first-inversion A-major against A-
minor suggests that melodic content is influenced by melodic contour tempered with voice
leading considerations rather than by the transformation of pitch-class sets.
Figure 3.5: Melodic Contour responses from Holland.
CSEG Y <1 0 2 3>→Invert = CSEG Y <2 3 1 0>→Retrograde = CSEG Z <0 1 3 2>
Figure 3.6: CSEG Y as retrograde inversion of CSEG Z.
Contour space differs from pitch space because it references abstracted relationships
between pitches; in this case, it refers to the direction and relative distance between a group of
pitches. True intervallic content cannot be derived from the integers in a CSEG, only the shape
of the melodic line. Like pitch sets, the order in which contour occurs is essential to the identity
of a CSEG, therefore functions like inversions, retrogrades, and retrograde inversions can be
46 Marvin, 79.
17
applied to CSEGs.47 I hear Holland and Rivers using these functions to create and develop
complex interaction in melodic contour.
In the performance of “Waterfall,” pitch sets do not appear in strict atonal usage as one
may expect from a serial composition. There are instances of pitch sets being used as melodic
materials, especially at the beginnings of certain sections, but they do not reflect coherent atonal
set transformations in the traditional sense. Pressing applies a greater load value to thinking of
pitches as set classes which makes it less flexible in the interactive environment of free
improvisation.48 These numerical values do not account for the possibility of performers
compositionally manipulating sets in real time together which would not only require the most
skilled of performers but, would require processing loads that make the act of free improvisation
difficult.
Though strict atonal pitch class compositional techniques appear absent, both performers
are methodical with how they suggest tonal material or sections. Tonal implications are generally
avoided in the contrapuntal, freer sections unless the duo enters a formal section that implies
tonality. Tonal sections appear in the performance but do not have enough weight to apply
harmonic analysis across the entire performance. Holland creates this ambiguity by avoiding I–
V–I or 1� (8�)–5�–8� (1�) relationships through the expansion or contraction of a semi-tone in his
melodic figures shown in Figure 3.7. Occurrences of strong 5�–1� relationships are heard with
emphasis in both tonal and “walking” sections of the piece.
47 Marvin uses these functions in the identification CSEG classes and similarity relations. I employ inversion, retrograde, and retrograde inversion as a means to identify possible interactions between Holland and Rivers. 48 Jeff Pressing, “Improvisation: methods and models,” in Generative processes in music: the psychology of performance, improvisation, and composition, ed. John Sloboda (Oxford England: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 156.
18
Figure 3.7: Ambiguity through denial of octave division 1�-5�-8�.
Despite the overall tonal ambiguity, Holland creates intra-phrase relationships in isolated
melodies through question-answer and development relationships. Question-answer and
development are terms that I use in this section to describe relationships between short, motivic
structures. They are recognized through contours, repetition, motivic material, and subtle voice
leading. These melodic tools have a resemblance to longer phrase structures in tonal music
where question-answer might be viewed as a parallel period and the development relationship
has similarities to the phrase structure of a sentence. The correlation to phrase types diverges due
to the harmonic implications associated with phrase structures, hence the introduction of new
terminology, but intra-phrase relationships appear consistently enough to warrant this
codification.
One example of this question-answer intra-phrase relationship can be seen in figure 3.8.
The defining contour of this model is shown with an ascent in the antecedent half of the phrase
19
and a descent in the consequent phrase. The ascending-descending contour parallels the natural
linguistic inflections of asking a question and giving an answer. Rising and falling lines are
frequent in music, it is important to emphasize that these intra-phrase relationships are
interpreted within boundaries that make sense within their context. Holland frames this type of
relationship in a range slightly larger than an octave and over the time span of approximately 6
seconds which make it perceptually salient.
Figure 3.8: Intra-phrase relationship: question-answer.
The development intra-phrase relationship has more emphasis on motivic and pitch
transformation procedures than the question-answer model. Figure 3.9 shows Dave Holland
developing a small motivic idea connected to a previous melodic phrase.
Figure 3.9: Development model with repetition.
Pitches A1, B1, and C2 (up to 0:55) inspire the initial A1, Bb1, and C2 motive which is
chromatically filled in with B1 and repeated until it manages a final chromatic ascent to Gb2.
This example relies on repetition as fuel for development, Holland manipulates subtle pitch
transformations and motivic splicing in place of repetition as seen in Figure 3.10. Holland
expresses two voices in this excerpt with the top line voice leading from C3→B2→A2 and the
20
E2 pickup (enhanced by the previous E1 pedal) voice lead from E2→Eb2→D2→C#2. The
rhythmic component of the motive stays relatively consistent through the antecedent half of the
phrase until the consequent breaks the rhythmic mold and the two voices reach the conclusion of
the phrase.
Figure 3.10: Development model without exact repetition.
Both intra-phrase models are crafted from evidence within Dave Holland’s
improvisations on “Waterfall.” These two models have advantages in tying melodic phrases into
district groups and these models can be applied at the phrase level and to the constituent parts of
the phrase as in Figure 3.10 when motive A and motive B combine as motive A+B. The
correlations to contextually tonal structures are intended to erode notions that free improvisation
lacks structural coherence or reference and suggest an amalgamation of voice leading and
conversational linguistic paradigms.
Marked pitches, melodic contour, and intra-phrase relationships constitute potential
improvisational tools within the axis of melody appearing in Dave Holland’s improvisation.
These tools are not insular, they are flexible and can appear in tandem. They avoid explicit
harmonic relationships and, instead, utilize concepts from semiotics (marked pitches), Elizabeth
West Marvin’s applications of musical contour, and linguistic metaphor to parse a highly
communicative improvisational practice.
21
CHAPTER 4
“WATERFALL” ANALYSIS – RHYTHM
Rhythm is a core constituent of the free improvisation in “Waterfall.” Melody is
inexorably experienced through rhythm, so it stands to reason that there are fundamental
relationships between melodic and rhythmic elements. Rhythm is also a component part of
formal and energetic structures in free jazz. This section explores the perception of free meter,
rhythmic variables employed in intra-phrase improvisation, rhythmic contours, and the
perception of rhythm through musical forces.
Due to the nature of free improvisation, establishment of tempo and meter is largely
subjective. Jost describes the understanding of tempo as impulse density. The term impulse
density refers to sound onsets over time. In his style portrait of Cecil Taylor, Jost states:
Above and beyond the impulse density, accentuation is instrumental in giving an impression of tempo. It is not the regularity of accents that counts, but their frequency in time. Here too, we must realize that changes in impulse density and accent frequency, and thus in the subjective tempo, are not the result of actions in the bass and drums only (as they are in Charles Mingus’s accelerandos, for instance), but arise from the interactions of all the players.49
Impulse density and accent frequency make for useful terms when referring to the rhythmic
qualities of the sections of “Waterfall.” The reference to Jost’s style portrait of Cecil Taylor is
not fully correlative to “Waterfall.” The difference being that “Enter, Evening” is through-
composed with an ensemble of seven members while “Waterfall” is free improvisation
performed in a duo. Keith Waters’s research on the Second Great Quintet states (accompanied
with an informative graph):
There exists possibility for intermediate stages between chorus structure (which preserves harmonic structure and three metric levels of hypermeter, meter, and pulse) on the one
49 Jost, 72-73.
22
hand, and the abandonment of harmonic and metric structure on the other. This allows further methods to consider form in improvisation, relative to the number of metric levels preserved from the head and relative to harmonic progression.50
Waters uses the term “time, no changes” to describe the quintet’s treatment of Miles Davis and
Wayne Shorter solos on “Pinocchio.”51 The term characterizes a departure from harmonic
progression, harmonic rhythm, and chorus structure, but maintains regular meter and pulse. This
description can also be applied to Holland’s treatment of certain sections in “Waterfall.” Most
importantly, the Holland/Rivers duo seems to agree on or to refrain from any impulse regularity
in the absence of formal expectations. The chemistry that Holland and Rivers have provides a
case study for rhythmic development and interaction.
The duo’s intra-phrase, rhythmic interactions employ three variables: transitions
(between parts), transformations (motivic development), and abstracted rhythmic contour
relationships. These devices are usually found in combination. For example, the transition of a
rhythmic motive between instruments might also be accompanied by a transformation of the
rhythm. In this instance, a three quarter note motive in the bass may transition to the saxophone
and simultaneously transform into a three eighth note motive. Simpler interactions generally
involve approximate unity in rhythmic division and occasional homorhythm. Figure 4.1 shows a
rhythmic interaction where Holland implies 6/8 meter in his part; then, the pattern transitions to
Rivers who transforms the pattern (through reduction) to a duple grouping while Holland
engages a weaker metrical level (quarter note sextuplets) before returning to a rhythmic and
metrical consonance.52
50 Keith Waters, The Studio Recordings of the Miles Davis Quintet, 1965-68. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011, 79-80. 51 Miles Davis, Nefertiti, Miles Davis Quintet, Columbia CK 65681, 1967, reissued 1998, CD. 52 This metrical level is weaker in the sense that it obscures the regular pulse of the section from which the example is extracted.
23
Figure 4.1: Rhythmic Interaction: Transition/Transformation at 3:58.
In the larger context of the section, this example is understood as a minor anomaly in a regular
flow of impulse densities; perhaps, more easily understood as “time, no changes”. Holland began
altering the walking-pattern flow at 3:56 by accenting groups of three eighth notes instead of the
previous accentuation of two or four eighth note groups. A homorhythmic unison at 4:00 also
marks a section change that departs from the “time, no changes” paradigm. River’s rhythmic
transformation returns to the previous duple grouping state.
Transformation of rhythmic ideas constitute another vector of rhythmic interaction.
Rhythmic transformation has a unifying effect due to motivic agreement; essentially, this
interaction sounds like explicit cooperation between the improvisers. Minor rhythmic
developments add interest and tension for the listener as their expectations are subtly challenged.
In Figure 4.2, Holland breaks the flowing quarter-note pulse and begins a pattern that deviates
from the previous “time, no changes” pulse. Holland accents the ascending dotted quarter-notes
(shown in the first box), creating an eighth note displacement of the pulse regularity. Rivers
continues the two-beat pattern with motivic transformations (shown in the second box) which
resume the previous quarter-note pulse regularity but develop the first quarter note rhythm of
each two-beat group. By the fourth repetition, Rivers expands the pattern to four pulses with the
first three pulses concluding his motivic elaborations of the previous pattern and the final pulse
ending the ascending pattern with a half-step descent to concert F5. The melodic content
emphasizes the rhythmic components due to the striking connection of the ascent to Eb2 in the
24
bass which is continued by Rivers with the Eb5 in the soprano saxophone. Continuation of the
ascending melodic line from bass to saxophone (C→F#) serves to anchor the rhythmic
development and can be seen in Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.2: Rhythmic Interaction: Transition/Transformation at 3:36.
Figure 4.3: Voice leading of melodic line anchoring rhythmic development.
Like melodic contour, manipulation of rhythmic contour is perceptible in “Waterfall”.
Elizabeth Marvin’s dissertation states, “Thus ‘rhythmic contours’ may be understood as
analogous to melodic contours; they represent relative durations much the same way that
melodic contours represent relative pitch height, without a precise calibration of the intervals
25
spanned.”53 Marvin applies principles of CSEGs in pitch space to DSEGs (duration segments) in
duration space, being careful to detail some conditions including problems of duration
measurement, metrical considerations, and the lack of cognitive research in rhythmic contour.
Marvin’s models of contour in duration space and contour in pitch space suggest highly
correlative relationships in cognitive processing which are feasible in a free improvisational
environment because of their isomorphic qualities.
Integers for durations segments are determined by applying 0 to the shortest duration, 1
to the second shortest duration, and so forth till all durations in a section have an assigned value.
DSEGs are ordered consecutively and may be subjected to inversion and retrograde functions,
just like CSEGs. The similarity to CSEGs also suggests that the given integers do not reflect
proportion of the duration, they only indicate that their value is longer than smaller integers and
shorter than larger integers.
Figure 4.4: Fabricated DSEG F.
Figure 4.4 shows a fabricated example which can be subjected to DSEG analysis. This
example can be reduced to DSEG F <2 0 1 0 0 0 2>. There are three durational lengths in this
example which means that values 0, 1, and 2 will be used in the DSEG. The half notes represent
the largest durations (2) while the eighth notes represent the shortest duration (0). Like contour
segments, repeated pitches are present in pitch space but are not necessary in defining contour
53 Elizabeth West Marvin, "A generalized theory of musical contour: its application to melodic and rhythmic analysis of non-tonal music and its perceptual and pedagogical implications." PhD diss., University of Rochester, 1988, page 158.
26
space because they do not represent a contour change. This also applies to duration contour.54
Compression of example 4.4 dismisses the repeated, consecutive integers and makes DSEG F <2
0 1 0 2>. Simplification of this DSEG relationship defines a binary relationship between each
consecutive integer. This simplification serves to reflect ways that I hear rhythmic relationships
between Holland and Rivers. In this case, DSEG F < 2 (-) 0 (+) 1 (-) 0 (+) 2> translates to shorter
note, longer note, shorter note, and longer note.
Duration segment application in this performance may occur from melodic fragment to
melodic fragment from the same player or in a relationship between parts.55 Like contour
segments, these variables are subject to the limitations of the performers cognitive processing
ability due to massive loads of aural information that must be processed with attention to
memory of previous musical events and cohesion in individual melodies. Duration segments
allow us to observe how the performers may rhythmically interact using durational augmentation
and diminution. Figure 4.5 is a restatement of Figure 4.1 with DSEG analysis.
Figure 4.5: Inversion of DSEG “same-contour” imitation.
54 These repeated notes may have implications in other analytical spaces, but I assume that the durational contour is more salient than the precise number and proportion of durations being perceived due to the improvisational and interactive nature of the music. 55 I determined length of segments from my own perception because of the ephemeral nature of improvisation.
27
This example shows a directly inverse relationship in the rhythmic contour between the
saxophone and the bass. While imperfections in the DSEG contour inversion may be viewed as
undermining the relationship, the minute changes are characteristic developmental choices that
fit the transformational style of improvisation. Figure 4.6 shows another set of rhythmic
interactions that benefit from DSEG analysis.
Figure 4.6: Durational compression of DSEG contours.
The short, repeated rhythmic values are sandwiched between groups of longer note values in
Figure 4.6 representing a motif. This motif unfolds as follows: DSEG X <2 1 1 0 0 0 0 3> is
presented in the saxophone and proceeds to be compressed and simplified in the bass in DSEG Y
<1 1 0 0 1 1>. The saxophone continues to compress and develop this rhythmic motive in DSEG
Z <1 0 0 0 0 1>. Compression, simplification, and development of the initial statement seems
intuitive as the performers create, listen, and react in the moment. The removal of repeated,
consecutive integers and addition of durational change values reveal the process of simplification
more clearly:
DSEG X <2 1 0 3> = <- - +> DSEG Y <1 0 1> = <- +> DSEG Z <1 0 1> = <- +>
Figure 4.7: DSEG (X, Y, Z) simplification.
This process of simplification may result from a variety of perceptual or creative reasons. Like a
game of telephone, the content may be simplified over repeated iterations due to perception and
memory in the improvisors. Specific or complex durational contours developed between
28
improvisors, though possible, seem less likely in the context of free improvisation.
Simplification of rhythmic contours would be easier to perceive and manipulate while also
allowing the improvisors freedom to creatively develop the improvisation. The simplification I
hear, shown in Figures 4.6 and 4.7, shows evolving rhythmic development being reflected in
both parts. Isolation of DSEG (X, Z) in the saxophone show the motivic development
(simplification) occurring within a single melodic line. The addition of DSEG Y in the bass
empowers the recognition of these subtle pattern changes occurring in the saxophone. Marvin’s
theory of contour in duration space models a perceptual mode that can be perceived in the intra-
phrase levels of Dave Holland and Sam River’s free improvisations.
Steve Larson’s chapter of “Rhythm, Meter and Musical Forces” has application to the
rhythmic components of Holland and Rivers free improvisation through Larson’s explanations of
inertia, magnetism, and gravity.56 The theory of musical forces maps the listeners experience and
expectation of music.57 I suggest that these forces also affect the way that free improvisation is
performed due to the convergence of listener experience and expectation in the ensemble. Larson
applies his concepts of motion, meaning, and metaphor to melody and rhythm, citing Jeff
Pressing’s “cognitive isomorphisms,” in music with tonal hierarchy.58 His provided examples are
drawn from Chopin, Boccherini, and Bach as well as Ewe drumming and Yoruba bell patterns. I
have also found evidence of these musical forces being perceived at the rhythmic level in
“Waterfall.”
Inertia, in Larson’s definition, is “the tendency of a pattern to continue in the same
56 Steve Larson, Musical forces: Motion, metaphor, and meaning in music, Indiana University Press, 2012. 57 Larson, 1. 58 Larson, 170.
29
fashion.”59 Though the effects of rhythmic inertia are observed in both parts, the typical bass role
in common practice jazz makes for a unique intersection of these effects in free improvisation.
Application of Keith Water’s term “time, no changes” can be interpreted as rhythmic inertia
being supplied in both cases (Miles Davis Quartet and Holland/Rivers) by a regular, walking
rhythm. This up-tempo walking inertia can be heard from 8:21–9:11(a), up-tempo walking with
some broken time can be heard at 2:24–4:01(b) / 9:54–11:27(c), and sections which do not fit the
“time, no changes” model but imply strong rhythmic inertia include 9:11–9:54(d). Figure 4.8
provides short excerpts from the previously mentioned sections.
Figure 4.8: Rhythmic inertia.
59 Larson, 144.
30
Magnetism, according to Larson’s theories on musical forces, is the tendency for motions
(both rhythmic and melodic) to move towards stable positions. In terms of melodic magnetism,
he defines this as “the tendency of an unstable note to move to the closest stable pitch, a
tendency that grows stronger as we get closer to the goal.”60 Rhythmic stability is felt moment to
moment along a time flow and experienced in reference to previous moments. Metrical
groupings add hierarchical levels from which to experience deeper levels of rhythmic stability.
Magnetism differs from inertia in that it is associated with the listener’s desire for instability to
resolve to stability, whereas inertia is the desire for a pattern to continue.
Applications of rhythmic magnetism in improvised solos of common practice jazz may
be observed as leveraging techniques such as syncopations, polyrhythms, and metric
modulations to create rhythmic tension. Tension and instability in these cases can be considered
synonymous. The rhythmic tension is ideally released, in conjunction with melodic tensions, to
create a dramatic solo arc. In free improvisation on “Waterfall,” the effects of rhythmic tension
via instability are perceptible and some of Holland’s bass lines have metrical implications that
allow for a stability↔instability continuum to exist. Sections with irregular impulse density and
accent frequency, also referred to as “rubato” or “free (of tempo),” lack a perceptible meter
which would allow for the hierarchical levels necessary to perceive instability. Figure 4.9
illustrates the inertial excerpts (Figure 4.8) with metrical groupings I perceive in my own efforts
to find deeper levels of local rhythmic stability.
The grouping of Figure 4.9 a and d show relatively stable rhythmic groupings with strong
inertial qualities and no anomalies in impulse density and accent frequency. Conversely, Figure
4.9 b and c contain irregularities in impulse density that, in the case of 4.9 b, serve to add mild
60 Larson, 147.
31
oscillations between more stable and less stable. Figure 4.9 c illustrates an interesting
intersection of stability and instability depending upon the metrical level that the listener
perceives. In my grouping for Figure 4.9 c, I hear moderately sized sections that indicate strong
perceived accents. These groupings do not fall into strict duple or triple divisions (nor is that
imperative of this musical style) but, they oscillate between triple or duple groupings at a
metrical level which suggests that Holland uses elastic metrical groupings in his rhythmic
language.61
Figure 4.9: Metrical Perception of rhythmic inertia excerpts.
61 Holland’s later quartet and quintet albums frequently experiment with complex metrical groupings, it is possible that some of these tastes would be evident in his work through the 1970s.
32
Perhaps the most intuitive of the physically mapped forces is that of gravity. Larson maps
rhythmic gravity to the downbeat movement in a conducting pattern. The nature of this
downward movement and its inverse, the upbeat motion, necessitate a “stable platform or
base.”62 It is problematic to apply Larson’s gravitational concept to the performance of
“Waterfall” because there is no pre-determined downbeat or upbeat (musical) gesture to which
the listener or performer can orient. His initial application of musical forces shows “ways in
which physical motion influences our experience of classically tonal music (music of the Bach-
to-Brahms era as well as much jazz and popular music).”63 I suggest that, in continuation with
his mapping of metaphorical physical motions to music, these free improvisations between
Holland and Rivers reflect a zero-gravity environment. If inertia and magnetism can exist in an
environment where gravity may or may not be in effect, so too can the effects of rhythmic inertia
and magnetism exist in an environment void of regular rhythmic gravity.
Musical forces provide a way to understand how individuals might experience music and
how to map expectations. I argue that the performance of free improvisation puts performers into
the simultaneous role of both performer and listener in a way that slightly extends beyond Steve
Larson’s original intentions. This indicates that theories of musical perception can have an
unmeasurable impact upon the performance of free improvisation and should be considered as
possible constructions, especially in rhythmic dimensions of improvisation.
62 Larson, 148. 63 Larson, 1.
33
CHAPTER 5
“WATERFALL” ANALYSIS – FORM
Melodic and rhythmic analysis of “Waterfall” frequently references surface level details
in localized excerpts. Comparisons of improvised content are presented in relation to how a
motive or idea is transformed or developed between parts. Form analysis of “Waterfall” suggests
coordination between Holland and Rivers to improvise individual sections that constitute a
complex structure. In an interview with Jon Liebman, Holland stated:
We did a few gigs with the band, but I think Sam and Anthony were both on their own track, so I ended up playing for most of the ’70s with both of them, but individually in their respective groups…By 1976, I decided to dedicate myself just to playing with Sam and I didn’t take any other gigs. In fact, I turned down gigs. I just wanted to focus in on one thing.64
This familiarity enabled them to improvise sections of music, depart from those sections, and
return at later points. These improvisational skills that arise from familiarity allow unprecedented
amounts of long term, higher order organizations such as form to occur over the course of the
improvisation with the only limitations being the performer’s collective memory.
Form in common-practice jazz has some degree of flexibility in its performance but it is
always understood in relationship to the song form. Many jazz standards65 are set in 32-measure
AABA/ABAC form where each letter represents an eight-measure section or 12-measure blues
forms; some compositions may feature 64-measure AABA or 24-measure blues which may be
viewed as metrically halved versions of their 32-/12-measure counterparts. Occasionally, songs
will exhibit common AABA or ABAC form, but the final section may contain a cadential
64 Jon Liebman, “Dave Holland,” For Bass Players Only, Notehead Media Group LLC, 22 September 2012, https://forbassplayersonly.com/interview-dave-holland/. 65 In this case, “jazz standards” should be understood to include the “Great American Songbook” works from Tin Pan Alley, repertoire from musicals, and jazz compositions.
34
extension, for example: a 34-measure AABA1.66 Dariusz Terefenko also points out this
phenomenon in his dissertation:
In general, each section within the AABA form is eight-measures long, with a clearly defined harmonic motion and well-articulated cadences. A four-measure phrase extension, occurring at the end of a tune can expand the total length of the tune to thirty-six measures. A two-measure phrase extension is less common and usually occurs in ballads.67
A performance typically cycles the song form starting with a statement of the melody, then solos
are featured from different ensemble members before returning to the melody for the final
statement. Large-scale AXA reprise form (head-solo-head) permeates typical jazz performance
and is so ubiquitous that Robert Bowen hypothesizes it as “reprise reflex.” 68
Beyond the continuum of standard to nuanced song forms, some more improvisational or
optional formal additions may be employed. A single time through the form of a composition is
called a chorus. Songs from Broadway musicals may have an accompanying verse that
traditionally occurs at the beginning of the song and which may be omitted from the performance
of this standard.69 Other compositions may have interlude material that is written into the piece
but may only be used in the statements of the melody and not in the form of the solos.70
Ambiguity excites interpretations of tunes through the extension or contraction of static sections.
These sections would then function as interlude material. This is evident Dave Brubeck’s
composition “In Your Own Sweet Way” which features a two-measure interlude when played by
66 Like George Gershwin’s composition “A Foggy Day” 67 Dariusz Terefenko, "Keith Jarrett's Transformation of Standard Tunes." Order No. 3143408, University of Rochester, Eastman School of Music, 2004, page 58. 68 Robert Eric Bowen. "Function and Meaning in Reprise." Order No. 3021965, Princeton University, 2001. 69 For example, “Dindi” or “Somewhere Over the Rainbow.” 70 For example, “A Night in Tunisia.”
35
Brubeck but has also been played as an eight-measure interlude in numerous performances
including a Kenny Barron’s album 1+1+1.71 Intros (introductions) and endings are also common
formal features which are exempt from any formal repetition but serve to set up or end the
cyclical interior.72 They may also become elongated structures with their own unique melodic
and harmonic features. Though these formal additions provide limited flexibility in the
improvisation of formal structures, they are all hierarchically subservient to the repeated chorus
structure, and they have strict relationships within the structure of the entire performance.73
My form analysis of “Waterfall” includes a table that details different sections. The
criteria for sections was based upon perceived tempos, bass line themes, timbre, and energy
levels in comparison to surrounding sections. Table 5.1 supplies a division of sections with
descriptions.
Table 5.1: Sections of “Waterfall.”
Section Time Description Notes*
A1 0:00–1:39 Free counterpoint. Interactive phrase by phrase. Lower energy.
Rubato tempo emphasizing melodic and rhythmic interaction. Arco bass. Rising energy trajectory. Lower, sporadic impulse density.
A2 1:39–2:24 Free counterpoint. Interactive phrase by phrase. Lower energy.
Rubato tempo emphasizing melodic and rhythmic interaction continues. Bass switches to pizzicato. Energy build starts over.
B 2:24–4:01 Bass walks, some broken time, higher energy.
Faster and regular impulse density (BPM=344→294). Foreshadowing of section change by 3:50. Holland and Rivers imply the increased impulse frequency.
C 4:01–5:06 Free counterpoint. Interactive phrase by phrase. Higher energy.
High frequency impulse density than previous counterpoint sections but lacks the regular impulse density of section B. Energy level is roughly level with previous section.
71 Including a track on Brubeck Plays Brubeck and on Brandenburg Gate: Revisted. 72 Tags, commonly a repetition of 2 or 4 measures of chords which function to reinforce tonic, may be considered in this category. 73 In practice, an improvising group would be confused in a member were to insert an unannounced tag or interlude in the middle of the chorus form.
36
Section Time Description Notes*
D 5:06–5:32 Free counterpoint. Interactive phrase by phrase. Lower energy.
Rivers signals the transition to lower energy into the rubato, pre-sax solo section.
E 5:32–6:31 Sax solo. Energy level increase through solo, peaks around 6:10.
Rivers uses a significant portion of the instrument range (roughly A3 to B5) and employs sheets of sound techniques.
F 6:31–8:21 Free counterpoint. Lower energy→ Higher energy.
Rubato tempo, starts at low energy but rapidly grows by 7:16. Section ends with high frequency, irregular impulse density.
G 8:21–9:11 Notable climax point. High energy.
Continues energy build. The high frequency impulse density achieves regularity (BPM=440→420). Holland repeats a variable length, similar-contoured "walking" pattern.
H 9:11–9:54 Slight energy drop combined with tonal folk elements.
Holland and Rivers begin a folk-like section where Holland pedals a low C (duple flow switches pulse to dotted half note, same quarter note at BPM=360). More hierarchical melodically and rhythmically.
I1 9:54–11:27
Energy builds higher. Interaction primarily rhythmic and through repetition.
Holland returns to a duple flow with occasional broken time elements facilitating interaction between both voices. Impulse density is regularly implied (BPM=330). Rivers transitions out of section H and Holland uses walking line contours from section G.
I2 11:27–11:41 Energy level recedes with sparse interactions between Holland and Rivers.
Holland and Rivers use short repeated motives and bring the energy level down to the pre-bass solo section.
J 11:41–13:11
Bass solo. Energy level increases throughout the solo, peaking around 12:50 and receding to the end of the section.
Other than the E1 before the solo and the F1 at the return of Rivers, Holland uses a range of A1-F3 which is conservative compared to earlier sections.
K1 13:11–15:16
Tonal and folk-like section with interaction. Pulse accents and beat density accelerate through 15:00.
Folk-like sections starting with tonal interactions with emphasis on pentatonic sounds including F2, G2, and C3 in the bass. Lower energy, sporadic pulse density and irregular accent frequency. It becomes more regular by 13:50. At 14:44, Rivers signals the next section with a fast, repetitive figures that grate against the prevailing tonality.
K2 15:16–16:33
Tonal center discarded, energy increases. Interactive despite traditional bass role reference.
Folk-like section ends as bass departs from emphasis on pentatonic sounds and develops bass line patterns from section G. Energy level increases with increased/regular beat
37
Section Time Description Notes* density and pulse accents and BPM=370-350.
L 16:33–17:08
Energy level drops significantly, rubato section till the end. Active saxophone with less active bass.
This section returns to the free counterpoint texture of the beginning though both members have reduced rhythmic activity as they bring the piece to its terminus at 17:08.
*BPM markings are approximate.
Figure 5.1 shows a piano roll of the entire piece with formal sections being labeled at the
bottom. This graphical representation highlights pitch-space over the course of the
improvisation. The graphic is similar in nature to that of a spectrograph where frequencies are
given visual representation. It is extracted from Transcribe! which filters the volume of pitches to
certain thresholds, eliminating passive noise and some overtones. The darker green marks
indicate more pronounced pitch onsets. It is then applied over a piano to give a visual
representation of pitch space and blue markers are added to delineate sections. This is helpful in
determining important pitch space usage over the course of sections. Table 5.1 can be used in
conjunction with Figure 5.1 to elucidate formal characteristics.
There are two similarities in the form of “Waterfall” and common-practice jazz
performance. These are individual solo sections and a correlative relationship between section A
and section L, resembling a reprise (AXA) form. First, solo sections are expected in common
practice jazz performance and typically occur over the chorus form between statements of the
head. Paul Berliner introduces his chapter on formal structure with this summation:
It has become the convention for musicians to perform the melody and its accompaniment at the opening and closing of a piece’s performance. In between, they take turns improvising solos with the piece’s cyclical rhythmic form. A solo can comprise a single pass through the cycle, known as a chorus, or it can be extended to include multiple choruses.74
74 Paul F Berliner, Thinking in jazz: The infinite art of improvisation, University of Chicago Press, 2009, page 63.
38
Figure 5.1: Graphical representation of form in “Waterfall.”
39
Free improvisation between Holland and Rivers during the 1970s diverges from formal
expectations in harmonic and strict-cyclic structure, yet the solo section E and J reflect influence
from common practice treatment. They both follow a standard arc: the solo initially builds
excitement and peaks over halfway through before diminishing back to a subtle state which
allows both members to build collectively into the next section. They do not interact with one
another during these solo sections, diverging from common practice treatment of soloist being
supported by accompaniment. The practice of unaccompanied solo sections is more common in
avant-garde performance. Naturally, the textures of solo instrument sections add depth and
contrast to the overall structure of “Waterfall” because of the prevailing duo texture. The two
solos are not contiguous which deviates from solo section expectations applied to common
practice jazz.
Figure 5.2: Transcription of the beginning and ending of Waterfall.
The characteristics of the beginning and the end of the piece are similar, reflecting reprise
expectations. Sections A and L feature lower energy with melodic counterpoint between bass and
sax free of regular tempo. These free counterpoint sections do not conform to tonal standards but
40
tend to resolve to vertical consonance, especially at the beginnings and ends of phrases. This is
evident in the texture of the opening and closing moments of “Waterfall”, shown in Figure 5.2.
They create a cyclical form at the scale of the entire improvisation, like a story arc where the
heroine starts her journey, going through transformation, and eventually returning to the place
where the journey began. The similarities between the beginning and the end are not exact but
their formal and energetic similarities create a sense of coherence.
In “Waterfall,” Holland and Rivers improvise complex, contrasting formal relationships
with recurring thematic material that transform and develop over the course of the improvisation
creating a sense of intentionality and contiguity. The clarity of sections and the diversity of their
content suggest robust imagination and memory. The formal delineations are a product of the
familiarity and acuity of the duo and their effective manipulations of this dimension.
41
CHAPTER 6
“WATERFALL ANALYSIS” – ENERGY
The rhythm created by the interaction of the two (Cecil Taylor and Sunny Murray) are a continuous source of energy.75
This was a truly high-energy music, racing too through Albert Ayler’s dervish tenor cries and Cecil Taylor’s molten arpeggios. Wailing, intense, claustrophobic, it crashed around you in the mountainous waves, whisked you like a cork along its headlong torrents.76
In the description of avant-garde performances and recordings, including those of Albert
Ayler, Cecil Taylor, or John Coltrane, the term energy is used to imply excitement and the
intensity of the performance. In free improvisation, energy is concerned with more subtle devices
used by Dave Holland and Sam Rivers. This subtly is associated with the subjective perception
of the performer/listener. Beyond the kinetic force of florid and elaborate melodic and rhythmic
flow, energy is also produced by the manipulation of timbre and range. Experiencing different
levels of energy requires listeners to perceive the sum of these variables within subjective ranges,
thereby making objective measurements indeterminable. Energy constitutes a wide range of
musical variables including tempo (impulse density), dynamics, pitch range, and timbre. This
section will explain each of these and examine them through Dave Holland’s improvisation in
the form sections A1, G, and K2.
In his book, Larson employs musical forces to analyze tonal music in melodic and
rhythmic contexts.77 I found musical forces to be useful in determining energy profiles for
sections A1, G, and K2. Musical forces are beneficial in the analysis of energy because of their
flexibility in application. The flexibility is due to the physical correlations that pervade
75 Jost, 72 76 Lock, 34. 77 Larson, 1-2.
42
descriptive analysis. For example: Inertia may be associated by continuation or deviation, gravity
may be referenced by adjectives like up or down, and tempo or impulse density continue to make
metrical magnetism relevant in descriptions of energy.
Tempo and impulse density strongly influence perceptions of energy, more so than any
other mentioned energy variable. Descriptive reviews from Jost and Lock apply the term to the
intense rhythmic and melodically active features of the first wave of free jazz musicians. High-
density impulses lead to increased perceptions of energy, but the nuance brought through
impulse regularity must be subjected to additional explanation through expectation as described
by Steve Larson.78 High-density, irregular impulses frustrate a listener’s expectation of inertia
and, therefore, demand more cognitive processing as the listener discerns patterns to expect. This
inertial expectation denial in addition to the high-density impulses projects nervous or frustrated
energy. High-density, impulse regularity conforms to the listener’s inertial expectations and
projects increased energy in the same way as a fast tempo in other music. The relationship
between energy to tempo and impulse density has a positive correlation.
The treatment of dynamics in “Waterfall” and other avant-garde performances is similar
to that of common-practice jazz. Dynamics have the power to affect the level of energy in music.
In common-practice jazz, dynamics typically follow certain contours in accordance with form or
solos; the head is generally at a mezzo volume and solos will start softer than they end, following
the arc of the soloist. Dynamics are like other energy variables insomuch as they have a
contextual component; the higher the contrast between dynamic sections, the more significant
the energy gain/loss. Measurement of dynamics through the subjective reference to previous
sections is employed more frequently than the precise measurement of sound through decibels.
78 Larson, 144.
43
Pitch range also has similar features as dynamics. Registral placement is used to increase energy
and has a positive relationship to the dynamic level; the higher the pitch, the higher the perceived
energy. These two variables exhibit a predictable, energizing effect in the context of free
improvisation.
Timbral experimentation and innovation in free improvisation takes on an elevated level
of importance. The “sound” of a specific player is iconic in jazz culture and these unique sonic
fingerprints are typically treated as a byproduct of the player’s technique. Jost graphs Archie
Shepp’s unique articulation style in Free Jazz and juxtaposes Albert Ayler’s low register sound
as rough and his upper register as thin.79 Timbral effects are not isolated to the subtleties of a
horn player’s sound. Charles Mingus would experiment with flamenco-like right-hand style
known as Rasgueado or the left-hand technique of pulling the g-string off the side of the neck.80
Sabin notes the importance that Gary Peacock puts on the importance of timbre in the music of
Albert Ayler as a primary expressive ingredient.81 Gabriel Solis analyzes Pharoah Sanders’s
timbral usage as central to his musical conception.82 Timbre is a notable variable in the listener’s
perception of energy and is a distinguishing part of avant-garde performance.
Use of expressive timbre in “Waterfall” is primarily demonstrated by Sam Rivers. Rivers
employs techniques including overblowing and growls as energetic devices during quick tempos
and/or frequent impulse onsets. Holland appears to respond to these effects with energy effects
including higher register and frequent impulse density, especially in section C at 4:28–4:35.
Dave Holland does not exercise a wide breadth of timbral options on “Waterfall.” Holland’s use
79 Jost, 107 and 124. 80 This can be heard on “Ysabel’s Table Dance” on Tijuana Moods. 81 Sabin, 314. 82 Gabriel Solis, "Timbral Virtuosity: Pharoah Sanders, Sonic Heterogeneity, and the Jazz Avant-garde in the 1960s and 70s," Jazz Perspectives 9, no. 1 (2015): 47-63.
44
of arco for section A1 is the most significant deviation in right-hand sound production, but his
improvisational responses to Rivers’s use of timbral manipulation suggest an understanding of
the energy created by these manipulations.
Section A1 (0:00–1:39), G (8:21–9:11), and K2 (15:16–16:33) have unique energy
profiles. The analysis of Dave Holland and Sam Rivers’s manipulations of energy variables
through these sections demonstrates how these variables interact. In section A1, the
improvisation opens without any defined tempo despite moments where both performers make
similar, flowing melodic gestures that contain brief periods of impulse regularity before
returning to irregularity. Energy is created from the denial of regular impulse density because of
the failure to perceive a metrical hierarchy. This expectation denial energy is heightened during
moments of unison rhythmic material or when phrases in both parts end together.83
Figure 6.1 illustrates Holland’s line during section A1. The impulse frequency becomes
denser after 0:50 creating “kinetic energy.” The increase of impulse density as energy is a
parallel to physics and is used descriptively by Jost in his profile of Cecil Taylor’s music.84 This
technique of energy production is also used by Holland and Rivers to maintain and build energy
through section A1.
Holland employs his formidable arco skill as the timbre in this section and it is the only
time it appears on this track. He produces a typical, robust tone without the use of any extended
techniques. Holland improvises in the pitch space between A1–G3 which is situated in a typical
range of the instrument. Both pitch range and dynamics are variable in this section, the volume
does not become severely affected until both instruments improvise in a higher tessitura around
83 For example, moments including 0:23, 1:25, and 1:39. 84 Jost, 73.
45
1:30. The louder sections are noticed more for the surrounding fermatas and silence.
Contextually, this section creates a standard from which to compare subsequent sections.
Figure 6.1: Bass part transcription of section A1.
46
Section G, Figure 6.2, occurs from 8:21–9:11 and exhibits significant amounts of energy.
Tremendously high impulse density and regularity, conforming to Waters’s term “time, no
changes”, define this section with Holland’s walking a bass line over 400bpm. Holland’s part
conforms to inertial and metrical expectations, creating significant amounts of energy from the
velocity despite lacking the expectation denial energy that exists at the rubato, free tempo
sections. The dynamics of this section are more stable than section A1. This is because the quick
tempo makes it difficult for the bass to play loud or with much dynamic diversity. Holland’s
pitch range is greater in section G (F1–Bb3) than in section A1 (A1–G3). Rivers also exhibits
extreme virtuosity in the section through a flurry of notes and the use of extended techniques
balancing Holland’s actions. Despite the subjective nature of energy perception, the extreme
tempo of this section and its relationship to surrounding sections make it remarkably energetic.
The last example, K2, is the penultimate section of “Waterfall.” It features a perceptible
impulse regularity and a tempo of approximately 350–370 bpm; slower than section G. However,
Holland’s bass line contains irregularities in the pulse that disrupt inertial expectations and
groupings of notes that cause metrical stability.85 Figure 6.3 provides a transcription of Holland’s
bass line for K2 from 15:16–16:33. The fast tempo creates “kinetic energy” in addition to the
energy generated by the mild instability in the (mostly) walking bass line. Holland’s pitch range
of this section is E1–G3 and the volume from both instruments is higher than that of section G;
this is contributed to the slightly slower tempo which allows the performers to play with more
dynamic contrast.
85 Occurrences of half-notes between quarter-notes would cause inertia to feel less stable. Groups of two and three quarter-notes weaken a simple, repetitive metrical gravity.
47
48
Figure 6.2: Bass part transcription section G.
Thus far, bass timbre has been defined by right-hand techniques like pizzicato or arco.
Section K2 contains some noticeable timbral effects from Holland. Raking is the drawing of the
right-hand fingers across the strings while the left hand, typically, fingers an appropriate melodic
gesture. Holland uses this effect but mutes the strings in the left hand, creating a percussive,
accelerating sound in the midst of his walking lines at K2. Pull-offs are common in bass and
guitar technique and they can also be used in conjunction with raking. At 16:27, Rivers begins
using a repetitive, overblown figure and Holland responds with a repetitive, rake/pull-off
combination which creates a significant amount of timbral excitement right before the
improvisation winds down into its final section.
49
50
Figure 6.3: Bass part transcription of section K2.
51
Analysis of energy through the manipulation of tempo (impulse density), dynamics, pitch
range, and timbre offers greater detail of nuances exercised in free improvisation. Holland and
Rivers use the variables to create energy though they may be considered more conservative in
their employment compared to other free improvisation or free jazz ensembles. The intimate
musical connection between them in concert with their constructionistic style makes their
improvisation in “Waterfall” an ideal product to analyze energy.
52
CHAPTER 7
PEDAGOGICAL SUGGESTIONS
This section presents pedagogical suggestions intended for bassists and informed by the
analysis of Holland’s performance in “Waterfall.” The organizational structure of the analysis
suggests melody, rhythm, form, and energy as different axes that can be manipulated when
participating in free improvisation. In contrast to the analysis, learning fluency in free
improvisation benefits from considering each element of the analysis as integrated constituents.
Excerpts from Holland’s part illustrate an improvisational vocabulary that differs from
traditional jazz styles and offers an opportunity to integrate these gestures on the instrument.86
Applications of these elements and practical gestures derived from his melodies can provide a
foundation for bassists to participate in free improvisation.
This chapter introduces melody, rhythm, form, energy, and performance elements as
practices and concepts to explore in the bassist’s practice strategies. These suggested strategies
are derived from observations based on the transcription, practice experience, and published
research in free jazz education and rehearsal.87 This chapter does not to provide a
comprehensive, positivistic guide to fluency in free improvisation. Dave Holland’s fluency and
expression cannot be reduced to any singular method and his musical relationship with Rivers
cannot be replicated. Figure 7.1 shows a diagram depicting the practice elements and their
constituent parts with an emphasis on their integrated nature.
86 In jazz, performers look to expand their improvisational vocabulary by learning patterns or “licks” from other players. In performance of jazz standards, these licks would be applied at harmonically appropriate places. The nature of free improvisation makes this practice less practical due to the lack of harmonic and formal structures. The spirit of communication and freedom in free improvisation may also be ideologically opposed to the repetition of other players. On the other hand, learning some of the ways that Dave Holland approaches melodies in free improvisation can spur the imaginations of those looking for more fluency. 87 I specifically reference research from David Borgo, Maud Hickey, and Clément Canonne.
53
Figure 7.1: Relationship between practice components.
Components of the melodic category include marked pitches, melodic contour, and intra-
phrase relationships. Marked pitches, in practice, may be employed to create conditional
responses in groups and these responses can be used in long-range development of the
improvisation. In Holland’s improvisation, they often appear as the initial or final pitch of a
melodic gesture while also managing to represent a degree of structural meaning. In “Waterfall,”
the overt qualities of a marked pitch do not persist at the same level through the improvisation.
Rehearsing this component tests the listening and memory capabilities of improvisational
participants. Using open strings can function as a convenient visual cue of a marked pitch in
group improvisation.
The appearance of marked pitches at the beginnings and/or endings of melodic phrases
also suggest a possible, practical application. Fluency in Holland’s phrases is expressed by clear
54
direction and intentionality. Marked pitches could be interpreted as one of the ways this
intentionality is manifest. In individual practice, planning where to end can help improve fluency
in phrases and, as Holland demonstrates, create cohesion in free improvisation.
Example 7.1: Marked pitches and fluency.
Example 7.188 shows a climactic section in A1 which illustrates the use of a marked pitch
as a phrase destination. This larger phrase is composed of three smaller phrases: A, B, and C.
Each sub phrase can be deconstructed into an interval filled in with stepwise motion and
connected to another sub phrase. In this example, B is a model representation while A and C
have slight variations. Sub phrase A uses repetition and lower neighbors to ornament the exterior
interval. Elision with the end of sub phrase B and the use of thirds conjoined with semitones
differentiates sub phrase C from the model representation. This example sounds like a seamless
phrase in context because there are clear beginning and ending points which give the listener a
sense of momentum.
Manipulation of melodic contour allows abstracted interaction to occur between
improvisors. The striking nature of explicit melodic imitation makes it a powerful effect, but it is
considered tiresome to employ repeatedly, undesirable musically, and difficult to maintain
indefinitely. Using similar contours can have a unifying effect without the problematic
characteristics of direct imitation. Contour can be manipulated to varying degrees which also
makes it an effective motivic and communicative component in group improvisation. The use of
88 There are no videos of his performance and these may not be the fingerings used by Dave Holland. “S” stands for shift.
55
melodic contour can also apply in situations when “time, no changes” is being employed.
Manipulation of contour during walking can be used to abstract melodic and rhythmic contours
from the instrument(s) engaging at more active melodic/rhythmic levels.
The question-answer model, associated with linguistic phenomena, can be used as a tool
to develop cohesive phrases.89 Example 7.2 shows a melody extracted from Holland’s bass line
with the addition of perceived fingerings. The structurally important notes in the ascent, B1–B2–
C#3–B2, are connected by rapid scalar gestures that fit easily in the two hand positions they
encompass. Similarly, the descent is contained in a single hand position enclosed by C3–C#2.
Construction of the question-answer model hinges on the contour of the lowest and highest notes
of each subphrase. The importance of these notes is brought out locally by their range90 in pitch
space and longer durations. In practice, the determination of the structural contour range has
priority over the melodic gestures that fill those outside points. Using slightly longer durations
for the structural points emphasizes their importance and perceptively anchors them.
Example 7.2: Possible fingering of Question-Answer example.91
At times, Holland embraces the role of the bass in its hierarchical tradition through
walking bass lines. His bass lines through section G show evidence of two different techniques
that he utilizes during incredibly high tempos: repetition and pivoting positions with open
89 Linguistics provides fruitful comparisons for music. Free improvisation may benefit especially so because of its freedom from typical melodic, rhythmic, harmonic, metrical, and formal syntax in common-practice jazz. 90 The range in this case tends to stay around the octave in each hand position. The linguistic connection also suggests that disjunct contours may no longer be recognizable since human speech is generally held in a smaller, more comfortable range which contours gently. 91 “E” stands for extended. This could be a mild reach or rotation for a typical hand.
56
strings. The repetition through section G is not exact and this, in part, expresses its organic
quality. The general contour is maintained with specific intervals being preserved at the pitch
apex of each iteration. Bassists can practice this by making long-range patterns that maintain
similarities that include motives or intervals at predetermined points while still being free of
harmonic constraints. This practice should be done at slower tempos to hone accuracy and
control necessary at faster tempos. In efforts to avoid complete premeditation, practice should
embrace imperfect repetition. This can be achieved by making a pattern long enough that the
contour of the pattern is easier to remember than its specific constituents.
Metrical ambiguity is frequently employed by Holland and it appears in his free
improvisations and his own compositions. Lello Molinari says this is based on a Polynesian
system that Holland was experimenting with in the early 1970s which uses duple (ta-ki) or triple
(ga-ma-la) syllable groupings. Conceptually, all meters greater than three are compound groups
of two and/or three. He says, “It can be applied to eight notes for developing improvisational
skills and to quarter notes and measures for composing and arranging tunes.”92 Metrical
ambiguity in free improvisation does not necessarily have the mathematical requirement to
ensure adherence to a metrical structure or expectation that is requisite of common practice jazz.
Free improvisation is an excellent setting for exercising this skill in a group. Example 7.3 shows
the use of a minor scale as a pattern upon which to apply combinations of groups of two or three
beats to each note of the scale. These groupings are marked aurally through the steps of the scale.
This can also be done on an eighth note level by keeping a constant scalar pattern of eighth notes
and putting accents on the down beats of different duple and triple groupings shown in example
92 Lello Molinari, “Dave Holland’s Use of Tempo/Meter Modulation,” Downbeat, March, 2019, 110-111.
57
7.4. More advanced practice includes moving the accent to different partials of the grouping
(Example 7.4, last system).
Example 7.3: Examples of metrical ambiguity
Example 7.4: Groupings of two and three eighth notes.
Alternating between a rhythmically supportive role and an instigative voice necessitates a
familiarity with fellow improvisors and with the bassist’s own improvisational process. Holland
asserts himself as an equal voice during free, rubato sections using rhythmic contours and intra-
phrase variables to develop ideas and interactions. His instigative ideas are typically concise
58
rhythmic gestures with a clear trajectory. They sound like functional, conversational sentences.
Starting with shorter rhythmic statements before building up to excited rhythmic activity creates
a logical progression that fits the free improvisational style of Holland and Rivers.
It is the interaction of Holland and Rivers through the devices of melody and rhythm over
periods ranging from 14 to 125 seconds which constitute formal sections in “Waterfall.” Formal
cohesion is evident through the contrasting adjacent sections and references to earlier sections.
Developing memory skills that associate certain events or combinations of melody, rhythm, and
energy to earlier sections is necessary for these complex formal arrangements. Bassists should be
conscious of role-related decisions as characteristics of sections. Holland may change how he
executes a hierarchical (supportive) or heterarchical (equal) role, but he appears to maintain the
spirit of the role in later sectional iterations. Memory practice can occur in a solo medium
through recording long sessions of free improvisation. During this long session, the student
would remember multiple sections and cycle through them, developing each one uniquely from
its previous iteration.
Practicing formal elements in free improvisation, like practicing any creative endeavor,
can be approached obliquely. This element can be practiced by timing contrived sectional
improvisations and by practicing contrived sections within a time limit. In both cases, contrived
simply refers to improvisational parameters that assist cohesion in the exercise. These parameters
could range from explicit descriptions like, “Fast/irregular/angular,” or abstract descriptions like,
“the color yellow” or “the sounds of autumn.” For timing contrived sections, the goal is simply
to create a coherent section, record the outcome, and review with other members of the group to
gauge where each member felt the end of the section. Review of this recording familiarizes the
group with individual members’ perception of events which is informative for future
59
improvisations. Rehearsing contrived sections within a time limit allows groups to practice
gauging the passage of time and practice working together to form coherent sections.
Constituents of energy include tempo (impulse frequency), timbre, tessitura, and
dynamics. These constituents have unique relationships with each other that cause them to have
degrees of positive or negative correlation. For example, arco sections will correlate positively
with an increase in dynamic. Conversely, persistent use of a Rasgueado technique would result in
a reduction of dynamic level. Energy is experienced not only in quantity, but also in flavor or
color.
Holland serves the improvisation by choosing appropriate combinations of energy
components and applying them to the performance. Comparison of Section A1, Section A2, and
Section C in Table 7.1 reveals mild changes in the way that Holland manipulates energy between
sections. Bassists should be aware of the decisions that they make in relationship to this energy
dynamic. As much as physics allows, developing the ability to control each component
independently hones both technical and musical intention.
Table 7.1: Section A1, A2, and C energy comparison table.
60
General Considerations
A duo is an excellent medium for practicing and rehearsing free improvisation. Clément
Canonne’s ethnographic study indicates the importance that free improvisors put on rehearsal.93
The importance of familiarity between Holland and Rivers cannot be understated in their free
improvisations. The function of rehearsal in free improvisation differs slightly from its function
in common-practice music. Traditional rehearsals provide scheduled time for members of the
ensemble to understand how individual parts interact across the ensemble and for the ensemble
to receive direction from the conductor. Rehearsals of free improvisation provide scheduled time
for members to learn how to interact with the other musicians and for the ensemble to form its
own identity. In the process of improvisation, a duo medium makes directional decisions easier
to suggest and follow. This flexibility allows for broader exploration of individual and group
personalities which, in turn, can make inexperienced bassists more comfortable exploring a
heterarchical role.
Institutional instruction of free improvisation is most effective as a holistic, rather than
prescriptive approach. A prescriptive approach would include “if X, then Y” statements with
qualifications including “Y better than Z.” The prescriptive approach in some educational
settings can be highly effective due to its direct, positivistic nature; it also tends to dismiss
contextual nuance or complexity. Prescriptive approaches counter holistic education and it is the
latter which benefits improvisation education. Maud Hickey suggests the use of enculturation as
opposed to a didactic educational approach.94 The term enculturation refers to the behaviors or
93 Clément Canonne, "Rehearsing Free Improvisation? An Ethnographic Study of Free Improvisers at Work," Music Theory Online 24, no. 4 (2018). 94 Maud Hickey, “Can Improvisation Be ‘Taught’?: A Call for Free Improvisation in Our Schools”, International Journal of Music Education 27, no. 4 (November 2009): 285–99, doi:10.1177/0255761409345442.
61
skills that are learned from the immersion in a culture. This idea correlates to the application of
“systems” or “ecological” theories that David Borgo describes as an alternative way to think
about traditional, didactic methods. This ecological orientation views knowledge as: “established
by the knower [embodied], the environment in which knowing occurs [situated], and the activity
in which the learner is participating [distributed].”95
The fluent interaction between Holland and Rivers illustrates clear organizational
relationships that are ripe for analysis. Their style of free improvisation reflects their individual
experiences in playing common-practice jazz. This provides a bridge that allows the bassist
familiar with common-practice jazz to more easily cross into the unfamiliar territory of free
improvisation. The preceding pedagogical suggestions are focused specifically on the free
improvisation style of Holland and Rivers which is not representative of the wildly diverse field
of free improvisation. More than five years of free improvisational experience makes their
improvisations sound easy or intuitive but, the reality is that their intimate knowledge of one
another’s style is difficult to replicate for the beginning bassist. Enough time and an ecologically
supportive environment would benefit experimentation with these pedagogical suggestions.
95 David Borgo (2007) Free Jazz in the Classroom: An Ecological Approach to Music Education, Jazz Perspectives, 1:1, 61-88, DOI: 10.1080/17494060601061030.
62
CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSION
My interest in this research was motivated by appreciation for the process of free
improvisation and the way free improvisation frames Holland’s approach to performance and
composition through his career. Dave Holland, widely known for his association with Miles
Davis, is one of the most famous bassists in free improvisation during the 1970s. His
associations with Karyōbin, Kenny Wheeler, Anthony Braxton, Circle, Carla Bley, and Sam
Rivers suggest his influence in the avant-garde and free improvisational community was felt
throughout the decade. His persistent collaborations with Rivers enhance the analytical value of
Dave Holland/Sam Rivers Vol. 1 & Vol. 2. The vocabulary employed by each member is unique
and developed. Flexibility in form and musical direction is easily discerned by the listener, but
their genius and acumen make it difficult to pinpoint the origination or impetus of the change.
This dissertation aims to discern organizational structures from Holland’s free
improvisation and use them to inform a pedagogical approach to free improvisation from the
perspective of bassists. The analysis of this recording focuses on melody, rhythm, form, and
energy as lenses to view his improvisation. The research did not conclude that this is the best
way to analyze free improvisation, but the method functioned to show otherwise abstract
patterns. The patterns informed pedagogical considerations that would be useful for bassists
unfamiliar with free improvisation.
Areas of Further Study
Analysis of a single track on Dave Holland/Sam Rivers Vol. 1 is a small sample of the
numerous performances by this duo. Application of these analytical observations to such a small
sample size risks distorting their legitimacy. A broader sample size of transcription and recorded
63
material may hone previous observations and introduce an improved way to conceptualize these
general categories of analysis. Further analysis of tracks on the album and on the accompanying
recording Sam Rivers/Dave Holland Vol. 2 would further identify gestures or themes that are
individual to the players rather than unique to the piece.96 These analyses could also be applied
to trio and quartet recordings on Paragon97 or Conference of the Birds98 for further refinement
and to test validity.
A mixed method investigation would benefit analysis of Holland’s free improvisation.
Mixed methods investigations, as described by Creswell, “could neutralize or cancel the biases
of other [purely qualitative or quantitative] methods.”99 Mixed methods, also known as
quantitative and qualitative method, multimethod, or mixed methodology is more than collecting
qualitative and quantitative data; it would use both approaches to create the study. This
combination would prevent extreme analytical conclusions with details derived from an
interview with Dave Holland and, conversely, apply a lens for interpretation of ethnographic data
from the interview and relevant historical/ethnographic literature.
Analysis of other free improvisation performances and recordings would test the
universal qualities of the categories. Sabin states, “As Peacock’s music was highly
individualized, so must be the analytical method,” which suggests the need of a flexible
analytical system.100 Resilience of this analytical model would need to be examined across many
96 Sam Rivers/Dave Holland Vol. 2, recorded on February 18, 1976, master number 28225, released on Improvising Artists Inc. 373848. 97 Paragon, Sam Rivers, Fluid Records FLUID-101, 1977, Apple Music. 98 Conference of the Birds, recorded 1972, released on ECM. 99 John W. Creswell and J. David Creswell. 2018. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Page 14. 100 Sabin, 362.
64
different styles of free improvisation to determine its efficacy outside of the Dave Holland and
Sam Rivers paradigm.
Reception of free improvisation during the 1970s is limited in scholarly research. This
may be due to factors including its minimal economic impact, general reception, scarcity of
transcriptions101, and other concurrent jazz genres generating more popularity and attention. Due
to the hierarchal role of the instrument, bassists may be unprepared for a heterarchical ensemble
role. The pedagogical suggestions are designed to help bassists build a foundation necessary to
tackle the unfamiliar freedoms and challenges in free improvisation.
These pedagogical suggestions would benefit from study related to their effect in building
confidence in bassists. Despite confidence not being correlated to free improvisational
achievement, the importance of increased confidence is fundamental to learning the skill.102 It is
also possible that these suggestions could be modified to be applicable to any instrument or
voice.
The idea of a perfect free improvisation, as if the execution of a technical exercise, fails
to grasp the beautiful gravitas of the improvisational process. The risk of failure and success is
fundamental to improvisation and cannot be “practiced” to perfection. Its risks lie in the creative
process “working out” and it is motivated by its novel nature; the challenge becomes
compounded with the introduction of other improvisors working together (or not!).103
101 Transcription of free improvisation is naturally flawed. The use of standard transcription practices may benefit from other transcription methods like spectrograms or other graphic analysis. 102 Maud Hickey, Kimberly Ankney, Daniel Healy, and Donna Gallo, "The effects of group free improvisation instruction on improvisation achievement and improvisation confidence," Music Education Research 18, no. 2 (2016): 137. 103 In John Zorn’s game piece entitled Cobra, improvisors find themselves trying to assert themselves musically in a complex rule system that pits members of the ensemble against each other. This is fundamentally different than the improvisations between Holland and Rivers, but it illustrates the diversity within the genre of free improvisation.
65
Development of analytical avenues for free improvisation create language that assists individuals
in ways to hear what is occurring in free improvisation and inform pedagogical strategies.
66
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Berliner, Paul. Thinking in Jazz: The Infinite Art of Improvisation. University of Chicago Press, 2009.
Block, Steven. “Pitch-Class Transformation in Free Jazz.” Music Theory Spectrum 12, no. 2 (1990): 181–202. https://doi.org/10.2307/746167.
Borgo, David. “Free Jazz in the Classroom: An Ecological Approach to Music Education.” Jazz Perspectives 1, no. 1 (2007): 61–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/17494060601061030.
Bowen, Robert Eric. “Function and Meaning in Reprise.” Dissertation, Princeton University, 2001. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/251107898?accountid=7113.
Canonne, Clément. “Rehearsing Free Improvisation? An Ethnographic Study of Free Improvisers at Work.” Music Theory Online 24, no. 4 (December 2018). https://doi.org/10.30535/mto.24.4.1.
Cogswell, Michael Bruce. “Melodic Organization in Four Solos by Ornette Coleman.” Thesis, University of North Texas, 1989. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2165/docview/193906873?accountid=7113.
Creswell, John W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc, 2009.
Elsdon, P.S. “Keith Jarrett’s Solo Concerts and the Aesthetics of Free Improvisation from 1960-1973.” Dissertation, University of Southampton, 2001.
Gioia, Ted. The History of Jazz. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, 2011.
Hatten, Robert S. Musical Meaning in Beethoven: Markedness, Correlation, and Interpretation. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1994.
Hickey, Maud. “Can Improvisation Be ‘Taught’?: A Call for Free Improvisation in Our Schools.” International Journal of Music Education 27, no. 4 (November 2009): 285–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761409345442.
Hickey, Maud, Kimberly Ankney, Daniel Healy, and Donna Gallo. “The Effects of Group Free Improvisation Instruction on Improvisation Achievement and Improvisation Confidence.” Music Education Research 18, no. 2 (2016): 127–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2015.1016493.
Hodson, Robert. Interaction, Improvisation, and Interplay in Jazz. 1st ed. Routledge, 2007.
67
Holland, Dave. Dave Holland: A Weekend of Bass. Interview by Dave Roberts. Online, May 2001. www.allaboutjazz.com/dave-holland-a-weekend-of-bass-dave-holland-by-dave-roberts.php?page=1.
Jost, Ekkehard. Free Jazz. Pkb. Da Capo Press, 1994.
Jung, Fred. A Fireside Chat with Dave Holland. Website, August 21, 2002. http://www.jazzweekly.com/interviews/dholland.htm.
Krumhansl, Carol L. “Rhythm and Pitch in Music Cognition.” Psychological Bulletin 126, no. 1 (January 2000): 159–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.1.159.
Larson, Steve. “Composition versus Improvisation?” Journal of Music Theory 49, no. 2 (2005): 241–75.
———. Musical Forces: Motion, Metaphor, and Meaning in Music. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2012.
Levine, Mark. The Jazz Theory Book. Petaluma, CA: Sher Music, 1995.
Liebman, Jon. Dave Holland. Website, September 2, 2013. https://forbassplayersonly.com/interview-dave-holland/.
Litweiler, John. Ornette Coleman: A Harmolodic Life. 1st ed. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1992.
Lock, Graham. Forces in Motion: Anthony Braxton and the Meta-Reality of Creative Music. 1st ed. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc., 2018.
Martin, Henry. “Prolongation and Its Limits: The Compositions of Wayne Shorter.” Music Theory Spectrum 40, no. 1 (2018): 84–105.
Marvin, Elizabeth West. “A Generalized Theory of Musical Contour: Its Application to Melodic and Rhythmic Analysis of Non-Tonal Music and Its Perceptual and Pedagogical Implications.” Dissertation, University of Rochester, 1988.
Michel, Karen. Dave Holland: A Jazz Bassist’s Bassist. Website, July 23, 2010. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128213469.
Molinari, Lello. “Dave Holland’s Use of Tempo/Meter Modulation.” Downbeat, March 2019.
National Endowment for the Arts. NEA Jazz Masters: Tribute to Dave Holland. Video, April 2017. https://youtu.be/36yzg8sirO4.
Ousley, Larry James. “Solo Techniques for Unaccompanied Pizzicato Jazz Double Bass.” Dissertation, University of Miami, 2008. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2165/docview/304570004?accountid=7113.
68
Pressing, Jeff. “Improvisation: Methods and Models.” In Generative Processes in Music: The Psychology of Performance, Improvisation, and Composition, edited by John Sloboda, 129–78. New York: Oxford University Press, n.d.
Rodwan, John G. “Sam Rivers: Remembering the Forgotten.” African American Review 47, no. 4 (2014): 523–35.
Russell, George. George Russell’s Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization. 4th ed. Vol. 1. 4 vols. Brookline, MA: Concept Publishing Company, 2008.
Sabin, Robert W. “Sabin, Robert W. “Gary Peacock: Analysis of Progressive Double Bass Improvisation 1963-1965.” Dissertation, New York University, 2015. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/1657429095?accountid=7113.
Shadduck, Anthony. “Charlie Haden, Scott LaFaro, and Harmolodics: Bass Styles in Ornette Coleman’s ‘Free Jazz.’” Thesis, California State University, Long Beach, 2006. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/304910219?accountid=7113.
Solis, Gabriel. “Timbral Virtuosity: Pharoah Sanders, Sonic Heterogeneity, and the Jazz Avant-Garde in the 1960s and 70s.” Jazz Perspectives 9, no. 1 (2015): 47–63.
Terefenko, Dariusz. “Keith Jarrett’s Transformation of Standard Tunes.” Dissertation, University of Rochester, 2004. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/305050495?accountid=7113.
Waters, Keith. The Studio Recordings of the Miles Davis Quintet, 1965-68. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Westendorf, Lynette. “Analyzing Free Jazz.” Dissertation, University of Washington, 1994. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2165/docview/304130888?accountid=7113.
69
DISCOGRAPHY
Coleman, Ornette. Something Else!!! The Music of Ornette Coleman. Ornette Coleman. Contemporary UCCO-90164, 1958, CD.
Coleman, Ornette. The Shape of Jazz to Come. Ornette Coleman. Atlantic 1317-2, 1959, CD.
Coleman, Ornette. Free Jazz: A Collective Improvisation. Ornette Coleman. Atlantic SD 1364, 1961, CD.
Davis, Miles. Filles De Kilimanjaro. Miles Davis Quintet. Columbia CK 86555, 1968, reissued 2002, CD.
Davis, Miles. Nefertiti. Miles Davis Quintet. Columbia CK 65681, 1967, reissued 1998 CD.
Holland, Dave. Conference of the Birds. ECM 1027, 1972, reissued 2000, CD.
Holland, Dave; and Sam Rivers. Dave Holland/Sam Rivers. Improvising Artists Inc. 373843, Master 28225, recorded February 18, 1976, published 1976.
Rivers, Sam. Paragon. Fluid Records FLUID-101, 1977, Apple Music.
Rivers, Sam; and Dave Holland. Sam Rivers/Dave Holland Vol.2. Improvising Artists Inc. Improvising Artists Inc. 373848, Master 30090, recorded February 18, 1976, published 1977.
Rivers, Sam. Sizzle. Impulse! ASD 9316, 1975, Apple Music.
Rivers, Sam. The Quest. Red Record VPA 106, 1976, Apple Music.