The 20 Most Romantic Renditions of Jazz Standards

Radio stations these days are replete with basic, ill-written lyrics about dating or makin’ whoopee. Should we expect more from modern songs? Sadly, probably not: the beginning stages of dating are akin to puppy love—sweet, not deep—and sex sells.

Where do we look for true love songs, then, especially on this Valentine’s Day? There are a lot of songs out there claiming to be the perfect love song, but I daresay no genre does the day of love better than jazz (and that’s the beginning of an entire thesis here).

After a healthy dose of romantic listening to twenty reimagined jazz tunes, read through to the end for tips on recreating sultry jazz standards in your own image.

What is a standard?

A song referred to as a “standard” or a “jazz standard” is one that the greater community of musicians considers standard literature for an accomplished jazz musician to know. They’re also songs that most people are familiar with (although some of these tunes are not as well-known as they used to be as we move further away from the halcyon days of ubiquitous jazz).

Fake books (which are published collections of lead sheets) usually contain an impressive amount of standards. Some were written for movies and then re-interpreted by jazz musicians, others were from Broadway, and still more came from the radio. A few blues and a handful of folk songs fall into the category of standards.

What to listen for in a romantic song

In this article, we’re talking romance, and not as in Chopin, Tchaikovsky, or Liszt. Think romantic in terms of candlelight, a cozy meal, and the great, great love of your life.

What makes these songs sound more romantic than others?

All of the songs contained in the list below are not only jazz standards, but also standards that express a particular longing or desire of the heart, so we have to go beyond the lyrics themselves to find the romance (after all, this isn’t a list of the most romantic poems!). Here, we’re looking for renditions that stood apart from the others.

You could, in theory, apply the following characteristics to any song and make it sound more romantic, more sensuous, and more lovely than it already was. When possible and available, I included tracks of standards that included:

1. A lack of overproduction. When it comes to romance, you want natural, authentic, and thoughtful. Too much added synthesizer, faux strings, and the like can take a solid song and turn it into elevator music. It’s like comparing between a fresh burger and one from McDonald’s—there’s definitely a difference!

2. Slower tempos. Sure, there are times for high speeds and kickin’ beats, but those are better reserved for driving down the highway or heading out to the dancefloor – not setting the mood for love.

3. Convincing interpretations. This might be subjective, of course, but I went about looking for songs that sounded authentic. I wanted the singer to make me believe that he or she really meant the lyrics they sang.

With these criteria in mind, let’s see what lovestruck crooners made the cut.

The Romantic Rendition Winners

Aaaaand the awards for “Most Romantic Songs” go to…

1. Fly Me to the Moon

Most romantic rendition goes to: Olivia Ong.

There are some keyboards mixed with piano and guitars at the beginning of this song, almost in juxtaposition against Ong’s pure, light, and simple vocals. Although Ong keeps the tempo at a relaxed place, the maracas and beat lend a delightful Latin-inspired influence to her take on the jazz standard:

2. The Very Thought of You

Most romantic rendition goes to: Nancy Wilson.

The way Wilson sings makes you think she wrote the words herself—a mix of purposeful pauses and hushed tones combined with some belted vocals here and there both reflect and capture the range and depth of feelings found in romance:

3. The Nearness of You

Most romantic rendition goes to: Norah Jones.

The simple accompaniment to Jones’ distinct and stirring vocals help drive these lyrics home. The passion especially shows up on the following lyric: “I need no soft lights/to entrance me.” Listen and you’ll see what I mean:

4. What A Wonderful World

Most romantic rendition goes to: Eva Cassidy.

It’s hard to top the splendor of how Louis Armstrong eternalized this song, but Eva Cassidy brings this song in another direction. Her folksy, bluesy vocals and slowed down tempo bring this song into the realm of love songs:

5. When I Fall in Love

Most romantic rendition goes to: Brad Mehldau.

Most people are familiar with this song thanks to the Celine Dion/Clive Griffin version of it that appeared on the Sleepless in Seattle soundtrack. While that tune might be a standard in the world of adult contemporary radio these days, it’s so poppy and processed that it doesn’t even resemble its origins in the world of jazz (kind of like how Velveeta doesn’t resemble real cheese).

Brad Mehldau’s version, while lyric-less, is nonetheless romantic and filled with emotion. At fourteen minutes, this instrumental take is a bit long, but it’s perfect for curling up with a glass of wine and staring out the window, looking out into the rain (okay, I don’t know anyone who actually does that and I’ve only seen it in film, but this song conjures up the desire to do just that):

6. Blue in Green

Most romantic rendition goes to: Bill Evans Trio.

Most jazz listeners probably know this as the fourth track on Miles Davis’ epic record, Kind of Blue, but Evans and his group make this song more sultry than sullen. Maybe it’s the movement of the piano over the cry of the horn? You decide:

7. In The Wee Small Hours of the Morning

Most romantic rendition goes to: John Mayer & Chris Botti.

I always knew that the man who sang “Your Body is a Wonderland” would have more to his vocal chops than radio-friendly pop tunes—just listen to the smooth wistfulness of his voice on this song and you’ll hope he puts out a jazz record sometime soon:

8. You’d Be So Nice To Come Home To

Most romantic rendition goes to: Chet Baker.

No vocals needed: the trumpet may never have ever sounded as sexy as it does when Chet Baker plays it here, where he takes his time completing the phrases, which is totally A-OK when it comes to romance:

 9. As Time Goes By

Most romantic rendition goes to: Jane Monheit.

A sad violin opens the song, which is unusual, but Monheit, as only she can do, manages to create a provocative rendition of an otherwise feel-good, sentimental song:

 10. La Vie En Rose

Most romantic rendition goes to: Daniela Andrade.

Andrade’s voice hearkens back to another era—the era the song was originally written in. Her sweet vocals atop the clean strum of an acoustic guitar make for a charming version of the original:

11. Dream a Little Dream of Me/Le Yeux Ouverts

Most romantic rendition goes to: The Beautiful South.

This song comes right from the French Kiss soundtrack—hello, romance. And what could be more romantic than hearing “Dream a Little Dream of Me” in French, the language of love?

12. My Foolish Heart

Most romantic rendition goes to: Kurt Elling.

Quiet percussion and Kurt Elling’s solo voice capture your ears and heart in the lusty intro, and ethereal piano notes lead into the verse. Elling picks up the tempo as the song goes on, but his voice is smoother than a glass of Cabernet Sauvignon and a box of Godiva truffles, both of which I want to feast on while listening to this song in a bubble bath:

13. The Way You Look Tonight

Most romantic rendition goes to: Tony Bennett.

Bennett takes his time to put this Fields/Kern song over; his thoughtful articulation is accompanied by subtle bass, soft drum brushes, and a piano that both accompanies and responds. In Bennett’s hands, this song becomes a ballad and an ode, departing from the original interpretation by Fred Astaire in the movie Swing Time:

 14. Come Rain or Come Shine

Most romantic rendition goes to: Don Henley.

Who knew that the singer of The Eagles and Boys of Summer had this much soul in him? Henley’s unplugged version is bluesy as all get out and has a lilting, anticipating tempo:

15. For Sentimental Reasons

Most romantic rendition goes to: Nat King Cole Trio.

The song was released in 1945 by Watson’s quartet with Joe King as lead vocalist on the Manor Records label. Since then, a handful of artists have come out with their own interpretations of the tune—Linda Ronstadt, Rod Stewart, and Sam Cooke have all had their vocals on this one. Still, Nat King Cole remains as king of this song. His buttery voice, the thoughtful pacing and phrasing, and not an ounce of overproduction come together to make one beautiful love song:

 16. Moonlight in Vermont

Most romantic rendition goes to: Josh Turner and Carson McKee.

This little-known version of the ode to the Green Mountain State features McKee’s voice and Turner’s creative guitar licks, which combine to produce one charming and tender love song:

 17. All or Nothing At All

Most romantic version goes to: Diana Krall.

Intricate bass lines, Krall’s sensuous voice, responsive guitars, and piano licks make for a seriously lush version of this standard:

18. Stardust

Most romantic version goes to: Harry Connick Jr.

Stardust is one of the most recorded jazz songs of all time, and as you may imagine, there are scores of different approaches to this tune. One could argue that it’s one of the most romantic songs of all time: the terms “stardust”, “fairytale”, “paradise where roses grew”, and “in my heart it will remain” are just total romance all over the place.

Take one of the most romantic tunes ever and pair it with one of the sexiest male vocalists ever and you get magic. Most of Harry’s songs have horns and fun big band arrangements; this one, though, is just the man and his piano. Bonus: the vibrato on the word “night” is goosebump-inducing:

 19. They Can’t Take That Away From Me

Most romantic version goes to: Diana Krall.

Krall sings about the way you wear your hat and the way you sip your tea in a breathy and almost-out-of-breath voice, and then reminisces about “the memory of all that” in a playful, flirtatious way. Add to that the piano, bass, and guitar, and you’ve got a trio of enchantment playing around in this song:

20. Body and Soul

Most romantic rendition goes to: it’s tied!

First, this is one of the most covered songs of all time. It seems like everyone has their own version.  There’s a huge camp of folks out there who are especially partial to the Bennett/Winehouse version (which was Amy Winehouse’s final recording). It took a lot of listening to narrow it down, and the most romantic versions out there are…

Female artist: Mishka Adams

The tempo allows the listener to focus on the words and the message behind them. The instrumentation holds interest while allowing the spotlight to shine on Adams’ voice, oozing with longing:

Male artist:  Jose James

James’ voice is equal parts luxurious and expressive, and he certainly uses his instrument to convey the depth of the lyrics. The song also takes an interesting turn halfway through—it stays in the realm of jazz, but the arrangement switches up enough to engage the listener even more, right before the final push home:

Leaning in Closer…

Now it’s time for you to strap on your instrument or warm up your vocal cords. Explore the wonderful world of reimagined jazz standards further in your own way:

1. Listen closely to the songs as a collection. Could you hear some similarities in these tunes, apart from the lyrics? What did you note?

2. Post-Modern Jukebox is famous for turning any non-jazz song into something that sounds like a standard. I was sort of looking for the opposite here – as you’ll see below, I’m not a fan of Celine Dion’s “When I Fall In Love”. (Lady’s got pipes, that’s for sure, but that rendition doesn’t inspire anything in my system – no warm fuzzies, no hygge-ness, no-winin’-no-dinin’.) With that group – and the twenty previous tunes – in mind, what non-jazz-standard love song could you re-interpret? It might not be a true jazz standard, but could you make it sound like one?

3.There are seemingly hundreds of them, so look for a jazz standard whose lyrics resonate with you – you’re sure to find one! Find the lead sheet for the song, learn the chords, and if you’re a pianist or vocalist and can accompany yourself on the piano or the guitar, create your own romantic rendition of the tune. If you’re learning another instrument, work through the song with a musical buddy to work out your own interpretation of the song.

4. If you can already handle the above exercises, why not try to fully arrange a jazz standard with the intention of making it sound more romantic?

Perhaps the world of romantic jazz standards will help you with your love life, but we make no guarantees. Happy Valentine’s Day!

Looking to write your own jazz standards? By developing your ear training skills and learning about intervals, chords, and chord progressions, you can learn to identify elements that make jazz, jazz, and use them to create your own masterpieces!

The post The 20 Most Romantic Renditions of Jazz Standards appeared first on Musical U.

How did two cutting-edge music teachers make it real for …

https://www.musical-u.com/learn/from-virtual-to-visceral-learning-how-to-learn-music-with-paul-levy-and-bob-habersat/
How did two cutting-edge music teachers make it real for their students using an innovative website? Learn more about Bob and Paul from Shed the Music https://www.musical-u.com/learn/from-virtual-to-visceral-learning-how-to-learn-music-with-paul-levy-and-bob-habersat/

You’ve spent years practicing and perfecting your craft. …

https://www.musical-u.com/learn/professional-attitude-6-insider-tips-for-every-music-pro/
You’ve spent years practicing and perfecting your craft. But are you really ready for that next step? Once you step beyond that garage door, here are six insider tips that have nothing to do with your musicality which will make you a valuable asset to any band or artist who seeks you and your skills. https://www.musical-u.com/learn/professional-attitude-6-insider-tips-for-every-music-pro/

More Ways of Knowing Music, with Jeremy Dittus

Have you ever heard of Dalcroze? It’s an approach to music learning that’s often discussed alongside Kodály or Orff, but until this interview we must confess that it’s one we didn’t know very much about.

We spoke with Dr. Jeremy Dittus, the founder and director of the Dalcroze School of the Rockies in Denver, one of the most prominent Dalcroze schools in the US, and asked him about his own experiences learning this approach and how (and why) he teaches it now.

Jeremy has been a lecturer in piano, theory, and solfège at the Baldwin-Wallace Conservatory in Cleveland, he has taught undergraduate solfège, piano, and composition courses at the University of Colorado at Boulder, as well as eurhythmics and solfège at L’Institut Jaques-Dalcroze in Geneva, Switzerland and Colorado State University in Fort Collins, Colorado. At the Dalcroze School of the Rockies, he now leads a team providing Dalcroze Eurhythmics and Dalcroze Rhythmic-Solfège courses to ages 4 through 14, as well as popular adult classes.

In this conversation we talk about:

  • How “reading between the lines” of sheet music, Schenkerian analysis, and Dalcroze training all helped transform Jeremy into the musician and educator he is today
  • What exactly “Dalcroze” is and how each of its five components can benefit a musician
  • How and why Dalcroze uses both the fixed and movable do systems of solfege
  • How Dalcroze can enrich a musician who’s learning in the traditional way, and why walking past a Dalcroze classroom typically means seeing a room full of adults smiling, moving and having fun

We found this conversation really illuminating and it inspired us to learn more about Dalcroze training. We hope you find it just as enlightening!

Listen to the episode:

Enjoying the show? Please consider rating and reviewing it!

Links and Resources

Enjoying The Musicality Podcast? Please support the show by rating and reviewing it!

Rate and Review!

Transcript

Christopher: Welcome to the show Jeremy. Thank you for joining us today.

Jeremy: Thank you so much for having me.

Christopher: I’d love to learn more about your musical background. I know a fair bit about what you’re up to now at the Dalcroze School of the Rockies but I don’t know that much about your early music education. Could you tell us how you got started?

Jeremy: Well it’s kind of funny because I actually studied with my mom when I was a kid. I studied piano and I studied with her for approximately eight months or so and then that sort of ended. My mom had a full studio and she was busy and, to be honest, studying with your parents can be really tricky and my mom was a great teacher but I maybe wasn’t the best student for her and so what ended up happening is that I would oftentimes just learn pieces here and there as I was growing up and it was just different because I didn’t have weekly lessons like most people would.

The other thing that’s interesting about my mom is that she’s deaf, almost 100%, and so here you have a deaf piano teacher that has this fantastic studio of students in very rural Ohio and yet there just wasn’t a lot of opportunity or time for me to be able to have lessons with her and, you know, all of the things that go with a parent-son relationship. They get complicated so, yeah.

But my mom was the person that introduced me to music and she really kind of instilled the love for music, I think with me. My dad played the guitar and I was raised on a steady diet of Patsy Cline and Kris Kristofferson so that was the background there. Lots of Waylon Jennings let me tell ya. It was good times.

And then after I stopped studying with Mom it was probably until I was a junior, I think, in high school before I started thinking about doing music in any way, shape or form. I had always wanted to go into medicine and that’s what I thought I was gonna do for sure and I went to a little school in Indiana, a little Quaker school called Earlham College and as a part of the process of checking out the campus I had the opportunity to think a lesson and meet a woman named Eleanor Vale who completely changed my life in many ways because she said that I should have a teacher and if I didn’t have a teacher and she would be my teacher.

So I drove as a, you know, 16, 17-year-old kid from Plain City, Ohio across state lines to go study with Eleanor Vale in Indiana and it was this wonderful experience to be like, free on society and, you know, studying music and she really inspired me to consider music in a more, I don’t know, forward way, I guess. So that’s kind of my background and then I went to undergraduate school and it wasn’t until my sophomore year that I actually declared myself to be a full performance major in piano and, kind of, the rest is history.

Christopher: So I see, and was your music learning up until that point kind of traditional, classical sheet music reading or was it more free-form creative? What did it involve?

Jeremy: It was definitely much more classical in design and I think what’s kind of interesting about my background is that I was actually never a very good sight reader and my reading skills were always really just generally quite poor and when I went to undergraduate school I really struggled as a result of this. It was something that was really tricky. Because my mom had this piano studio I heard a lot of music and the house all the time and oftentimes that was the music that I would play so it was almost quasi-Suzuki in that way, in the sense that I had this really strong aural stimulus in the house and of course these are piano students so it’s not like I’m hearing the world’s best renditions of these pieces but nevertheless that’s what — that’s how I learned a lot of pieces for myself was because I had heard them.

So I did a lot of playing by ear even though I would use sheet music to kind of figure things out. I didn’t necessarily use it to, like, study the forms, study the harmony. I did not use it in those ways. I was very, very poor at reading rhythm, which is funny, because now that’s what I do and, yeah. So it’s interesting.

Christopher: I see. And so you went in to major, as your undergrad, in music and obviously now your big focus is on the Dalcroze method, particularly. Where did that come from? When did you discover that? How did it come about?

Jeremy: Total luck. It just so happened to be that at my undergraduate school, which was the Baldwin-Wallace University in Cleveland. When I went to undergrad there was somebody there, Mary Dobrea Grindahl and she was in charge of piano pedagogy and she was in charge of solfège there and she had worked into the entire solfège program a eurythmics component and so every day, or, sorry — every week we would have classes with her for an hour. We would have an hour of eurythmics and we’d have two other separate classes for solfège and that is really how I learned rhythm because everything was so strongly aural. The visual component was very different for me and so I never really understood rhythm well at all until I had this course and partially because I was a gymnast in high school I had a strong kinesthetic, I don’t know, sense I guess. I was drawn to kinesthetic things. I’d always loved to work with my hands, that kind of thing. So this just totally made sense to me that you would study rhythm through movement and it completely changed how I heard music, how I felt music, how I communicated music. It was really a godsend for me because I don’t know if I would be doing what I’m doing now had I not had that experience.

Christopher: So paint a picture for us then. You had been learning piano in quite a traditional way and then suddenly as part of your undergrad you had this one hour each day of eurythmics and solfège. What were you doing in that hour? How did it all come to life for you in that way?

Jeremy: Well that’s kind of complicated I suppose. I mean — and to be honest it was a long time ago but —

Christopher: Okay. Well let me ask you a different question then. If you were going to give a young undergrad an hour of Dalcroze training each day what might that look like and how might it give them that kinesthetic sense of rhythm in the way you just mentioned?

Jeremy: Sure. So for the classes that I teach when I am teaching undergraduates the most important thing is that I give them multiple ways of knowing the same concept so oftentimes it starts with me at the piano and them moving, just doing something totally pedestrian like just walking and adjusting the speed of their gait to the tempo that I produce from the piano while I’m improvising and from there, from that point of departure, we go into any number of subjects.

It could be meter, it could be beat, it could be division. It could be multiple, like in other words, by combining multiple beats together you create a large beat value. Anacrusic phrasing, measure shape, syncopation — you name it, but it starts from there and my thing as a teacher, especially if I’m working with college students and I think that Mary would agree with me that it’s not as much about the difficulty as it is about the sensation. The sensation is where it’s at. How we sense something, how we feel it in the body, that’s what gives us the impulse to want to create it and to communicate that and that element is inherent in every one of us. I don’t care if you are a six-month baby or if you’re a 90-year-old grandmother, that impulse is there and when you give permission for that to take place I think it’s something that’s really marvelous.

Christopher: I see. I think that definitely gives a sense of how those sessions would have been quite different from sitting at a piano and playing from sheet music. It sounds like there’s a lot of movement involved. There’s a lot of physicality involved that’s often, you know, just, not a part of music education except, you know, where do you put your fingers on the instrument.

Jeremy: Absolutely. I think that the essence behind what we do, whether or not I’m dealing with college students or if I’m dealing with four-year-olds is that I want to give them an experience and I want to give them many, many experiences of the same technical concept, like, let’s say, beat, but I want to give them those experiences in very, very different ways.

So I stimulate their kinesthetic sense and I stimulate their aural sense and then I stimulate their visual sense as well. So we’re combining all of these things together so no matter what the learning style, that students are experiencing things in many, many different ways and once they’ve had that experience then I can say “This is what it looks like. This is what we call it and this is the definition,” which is still to this day pretty novel, I guess, I mean, most of us were taught in a very different way.

Christopher: Yeah. Almost the exact opposite, you know, “Let’s study the symbols and then slowly learn to play them and then we might think about how to make them musical.”

Jeremy: Mm-hm.

Christopher: Okay. So you had this very different experience then. Was it love at first sight? Were you a Dalcroze devotee from day one, or how did the next few years go for you?

Jeremy: Well I mean, I loved Mary’s classes, I mean, I always looked forward to them and I’m still close friends with her to this day. She has actually taught at my Dalcroze Summer Academy and we bring her out to Denver for workshops all the time. She’s just fantastic.

But, you know, I did a little bit of tutoring and volunteering at the university when I was a student and I enjoyed that but for me it was tricky because I was also a chemistry student. I had always this strong penchant for medicine and that’s what I thought I wanted to do and it wasn’t until, like, the witching hour, the very, very end of my undergraduate that I was, like, “Mmm, I think I’m gonna try and see what happens. I’m gonna apply to music schools,” and I got in to CCM, the Cincinnati Conservatory of Music, and I decided to do that just to see how it would feel because I thought, my thought process at the time was, “Well, I can always go back to medicine but music is something if you don’t keep it going then it kind of goes away.”

Christopher: It’s nice to have medicine as your fallback option. I like that.

Jeremy: Well, yeah, it’s kind of funny, isn’t it? It’s crazy. So anyway, I went to CCM and I had several different piano teachers while I was there for a couple of different reasons. One of the teachers that I was assigned at the time was Michael Chertok, and he was awesome. I loved him but he was only there for a short time because then he went on sabbatical. And then I had his teacher which was Frank Weinstock who was also amazing but I ended up having these, this, kind of, sort of choppy piano background and that was really challenging for me because I had this teacher in undergrad for piano who really was all about bringing the page to life and reading between the lines on the score and all of that kind of thing and that’s hard to develop that type of a relationship with a teacher if that’s not where you are and you don’t have that depth of a relationship when you’re changing a lot of the time and so I really fell in love with the theory program there.

There was a guy named Frank Samarotto who was there who was amazing and he was a Schenkerian and I totally fell in love with Schenkerian analysis, like, just took to it like glue and it has stuck to me for — to this day. But I always had this real disconnect and I think that this is very real for many, many, many people when they leave either undergrad or graduate school that the theory community tended to stay off in one wing of the music conservatory and the performance community was in another and they did not necessarily interact very well or very much, I should say, and that was something that was really hard for me because I had, like, Frank was so intense about delving into the score and what’s inside the music and how do you bring that out and how’s that gonna affect your performance and my performance teachers, who were a little bit more focused on the technical aspects of making it happen and who knows — I’m sure it was a lot to do with me and my kinesthetic ability at the time and all of that, but I felt like I couldn’t make those connections and it was something that I really, really wanted for myself.

And so when I was thinking after I finished my master’s degree, where I had done all of this theory training and all this performance training, I wanted to find something that would fit those two things in dialogue and I remembered back in my undergrad this experience of having classes with Mary Dobrea and how it totally changed me and so I called her up and said, “Hey, what do you think? What do you think about this? What should I do?” and she recommended that I study at the Longy School and so I went to the Longy School of Music in Cambridge, Massachusetts during the summers while I was doing my doctorate in piano performance and I think that that experience of having this really intense corporeal understanding of music in the summers helped to feed my doctoral studies and it helped me become the teacher that I am today because I’ve combined what I know in Schenkerian theory, I’ve combined what I know in movement from being a gymnast. I’ve combined all of this pretty extensive performance background to put something together that is really meaningful to me and I hope, I think, for my students, too.

Christopher: Wonderful. I didn’t want to interrupt you there but there are a couple of things I wonder if you could just explain a bit more about. One is that you said your teacher was helping you to read between the lines as you played piano. What do you mean by that?

Jeremy: I think — oh gosh, it’s so hard. Dr. Cherry was kind of like a magician, you know? I mean, I remember I was playing the Liszt concerto and, you know, that piece is wicked hard. It just has so much in it that’s very complicated and especially for me as an undergrad, I did not have the experience to really rely on so he was trying to help feed me different ways of studying the score and I remember he would point things out like, “Listen for this line here. Can you hear it? Can you see it on the score? Can you see that? I want you to bring that out in your pinky, let’s say, in your left hand,” or “It’s an inner voice and I want you to listen to how that affects the shaping,” and it was sort of like magic.

Like, all of a sudden because I listened to this one inner voice it completely changed how I heard the music and because it changed how I heard it the physical technique sort of fell into place for me to be able to play it and there are countless other stories that were like that where he would, let’s say, draw attention to pedaling detail, pedaling that is, you know, very well may be on the page but he was so particular about pedaling.

There’s a guy named Joseph Banowitz who wrote a book on pedaling, and its, like, an inch and a half thick. It’s just this tome and he and my professor would have gotten along like two peas in a pod, you know, because Dr. Cherry’s perspective on this was, “If I can hear that you’re pedaling, you’re not doing it right,” and that’s not something that you could find in the score, necessarily. It’s something — overtly. I mean, you could find it written, P-E-D, with a dot, you know, or an asterisk, but what he was saying is, “What are you trying to say through the music? What do are you finding in the score? How can your foot help to bring that out and make that clearer to an audience and whatever your intentions are, what are you trying to say through the music?” And those are two very small examples but they were very powerful for me as a young student.

Christopher: Yeah. That makes a lot of sense and I think it explains how you were kind of rescued from the trap I think a lot of instrument learners fall into of starting to play a bit like a robot, you know, “If I play the right notes at the right times I’m doing my job,” but clearly your teacher there was helping you to draw out the music from the sheet music. He was helping you find the interpretation that you actually wanted to express.

Jeremy: Absolutely, and I think that because of that it really — and it coupled with the Dalcroze that I had as an undergrad and moving on to other periods of my life has really allowed me to have a sense of suppleness when I approach a piece of music. I am not prisoner to the page in the way I might have been in the past and I think that that can be very liberating.

Don’t get me wrong, I think that there is so much structure that’s in the music itself that we have to delve into but that’s where the idea of a physical experience of those concepts no matter what they are can make it easier for you, I think, as a performer, so.

Christopher: Very cool. So speaking of structure, the other thing I wanted to just pick up on before you move on was Schenkerian analysis — hard to even say — Schenkerian analysis, which is not something you find people, you know, falling in love with very often. Can you just explain to the audience in a nutshell what it is and why it was interesting to you?

Jeremy: Sure. So Henrik Schenker was a theorist and a philosopher and he essentially came up with a way of analysing music that highlighted all of the structural components, both melodic and harmonic and sometimes rhythmic, you know, so these pitch and harmony together but dividing up — sorry — pitch and rhythm together but dividing up pitch into two components, melody and harmony and putting them in a kind of contrapuntal sketch that had many, many layers.

So at the top, you know, you have pretty much the way the music sounds and maybe a Roman numeral analysis of what are the harmonies and where are they going, but then in each subsequent layer that you go through you find that some notes are maybe less important or some notes are more important than others. Some notes have more structural significance than others and they prove to be goals. Like, let’s say, the end of an antecedent consequent relationship in terms of a question-answer phrase. You’ve got that and so that’s a big moment or the end of a significant cadence or the end of a structural section.

These are all points that we want to bring out that sometimes get lost when we do a typical Roman numeral analysis, again because of the visual aspect of it. It’s all just under the page and you don’t really see a hierarchy but the Schenkerian analysis allows us to give a hierarchy to what we listen to and in that way the analysis is very personal and it allows us to really talk about what do we find meaning, or what do we find meaningful, in the score.

Eventually, you bring down almost every single piece of tonal music to either a 3-2-1 progression like (sings) “Three blind mice, 3-2-1,” or “5-4-3-2-1,” in the soprano and basically a “1-5-1” or “1-2-5-1” and these kinds of reductions in the harmony. For me that’s less important when I go down to that level. I’m not saying that it isn’t important. It’s just less important for me. That’s not how I find it to be useful. How I find it to be useful for me is that when I’m looking at an analysis like this, when I’m doing it, when I am improvising I find myself creating these structures in my own improvisation, in my own playing and when I’m performing I’m moving toward those structures so my, I hope that when people hear my music that they can hear that I am being very directed in my playing. There’s a sense of tension and release that comes from arrival points at these structural, I don’t know, goals or milestones in the piece, so. Is that helpful?

Christopher: It is. I think that’s the most interesting and compelling description of it I’ve ever heard. You managed to make it sound practical and useful in a way that’s often missing. Very cool.

So it sounds like that was, interestingly, another way that you discovered to transform what can be a very, kind of, opaque sheet of music into something that has structure, has meaning and has a way for you to bring it to life.

Jeremy: It’s been very powerful for me. It’s been very powerful.

Christopher: So you did your PhD. Where did you go from there?

Jeremy: So after I finished — it’s funny, I did a couple of rounds of auditions for academic jobs because, you know, if you’re gonna do a doctorate, that’s, like, the next thing, right? I mean, you go get a job in a university and I had taken a sabbatical replacement job when I was finishing up my DMA and did these different things and to be perfectly honest, I wasn’t always happy. I just, I don’t, something about it just didn’t seem right and I’m sure it’s just who I was at the time and maybe even who I am now, but it just didn’t feel right and I can remember sitting in my office at school and I had just finished my Dalcroze training at Longy and I’d studied with some of the best teachers in the world, Lisa Parker and Ann Farber and Ruth Alperson and Jenny Latz and just really class-act musicians and human beings and I just sat down and said, “I don’t think I’m gonna do this. I think I’m going to just try my hand at teaching Dalcroze for a little while and just see what happens,” which, you don’t know my personality but that is not the way anything in my life had ever got. I was out of high school, right into undergrad, right into graduate school, right into my doctoral programs. I went to school year-round. I mean, it was just, I’d been a professional student for a long time and to say that that’s not what I was gonna do was a really big deal for me. I know for some people it’s, like, no big deal, but for me it was.

And it was so bizarre because it was, like, the next day I got a phone call from somebody that said, “Hey, I’m offering this event and I would really love to have a Dalcroze specialist. Would you be willing to come?” and Tamara Goldstein, who is a fantastic pianist here in Denver was running a piano celebration and she invited me to come and I taught a class and Bill Westney, who wrote an amazing book called, “The Perfect Wrong Note,” — if you don’t know that book, you should definitely check it out. It’s amazing. He actually was a Dalcroze student himself when he was a child and he has gone on to win international competitions as a pianist and he teaches in Texas, but he showed up to my class.

So, like, this guy that I read about who was this, you know, just, monument of a person shows up to my first class and I’ll never forget it, because he came up to me afterwards and he shook my hand and he said, “You were born to do this,” and that was really touching to me, do you know what I mean? It was, like, one of those moments that just — people don’t usually say things like that, certainly not to me and it was powerful, a powerful thing to say. That was a big shaping moment, because I felt like that moment in the office this particular gig or two gigs and then all of the sudden this whole door just opened and now this is where I am.

I taught for two years here in Denver. I had probably about 75 students or so in my programs and lots of people were asking me about teacher training and I had a certificate and I had a Dalcroze license. Those are kind of like our bachelor’s and our master’s degrees in our field but in order to be able to teacher train you have to get something called the Diplome Superior which just means it’s the highest diploma. It doesn’t mean that you’re superior (laughs), just that you — but it’s the highest level and so I auditioned and was promptly rejected from the Institut Jaques Dalcroze in Switzerland because that’s where you have to go to get this credential and then I said, “Phooey, I’m going there,” and I went and studied there for a year and re-auditioned and then finished my diplome in six months and came back and started my school. So that’s where I’ve been.

Christopher: Wow. And we’ve got a bit of a sense of what’s involved in Dalcroze and how it differs from traditional music education but can you unpack it a little more? What are the key components to it? What is it that defines Dalcroze as a methodology?

Jeremy: Sure. So Dalcroze can be very difficult to talk about because it’s so comprehensive and I think it deserves mentioning that Dalcroze himself — it’s a man who’s around in Switzerland the first part of the 20th century — he was a composer, he was a philosopher, he was a musician himself and he was a pedagogue, so his perspective about all of this at the beginning was decidedly about music training. That’s what he wanted, that’s what he was doing, that’s what this all stemmed from. So for him it was about solfège and it was about improvisation and it was about this thing called La Technique.

So we have translated that first in Britain and now in the United States as eurythmics, so “eu-” meaning good and “-rhythmos” meaning rhythmic or rhythm. So good rhythm is what it comes from or stems from and those classes, those eurythmics classes were essentially — the goal of them was to embody all elements of music from all — the whole gamut of pitch and rhythm, form and structure, all of that would come together in a eurythmics class.

That’s not to say the solfège classes and the improvisation classes weren’t physical, either and you kind of see this in a slightly different way depending on where you study. At the Dalcroze School of the Rockies it’s very important to me that we physicalize everything. So all solfège is to be done with movement. So my thing that I say to my students is, “If you’re not moving while you’re singing, something’s wrong, so you’ve got to fix it,” and, but that’s unique to my school. That’s a part of my style. It’s something that I do, but I think that’s important to say all of this happened back in the first part of the 20th century.

In addition, there has now evolved some applied branches of what we do in Dalcroze study, which is called plastique anime. Plastique anime is kind of our performance outlet for what we do. It’s a type of visual analysis using the body as the vehicle and we tend to do it using a written score, so a composed score. Other places around the world will do it slightly different. Sometimes they will do them improvised, for instance, either with improvised piano music or the movement is improvised so there’s different applications. It’s not quite as rigid. But in the U.S. we tend to think of it in that way. It can be with soloists, it can be with an entire group.

You can really have the gamut, but it’s wonderful because I actually think of it very similarly. It’s how I think of Schenkerian theory because it’s all about demonstrating what I find valuable in the piece but instead of being limited to just Roman numerals I’ve got the whole expressive capacity of the body and that, I think, is really, really wonderful and communicative and meaningful in a way that I think, you know, Roman numeral analysis great but it can be a little sterile, you know, if it’s not done well and so this is a great alternative.

And then the fifth branch is pedagogy, methodology. What are we doing and how do we do it? So all of those five branches, eurythmics, solfège, improvisation, plastique anime and pedagogy comprise the method of Jaques Dalcroze and that is primarily as a vehicle for teaching music, however, as Dalcroze aged and his disciples went off into the world there have been many, many applications to many different fields. Kids with special needs, students with learning disabilities, different ways of looking at, just, let’s say, classroom teaching. How can we use movement and the body to teach math? How can we use music to teach any number of subjects? Like, that all has a root in Dalcroze.

You might remember something called Schoolhouse Rock when you were a kid or maybe you might — I think you’re too young for that but back in the 80’s this was a big thing and, like, you know, my husband, for instance, I mean, he can recite to this day all of the presidents and all of the little jingles that go with the coordinating junctions and all this sort of thing because of Schoolhouse Rock. So it really has had an impact and people don’t realize that that all comes from what Dalcroze did and also has been a huge force in work with senior citizens mostly in Europe but we’re starting to see it in the United States how we’ve got these seniors that are falling and they’re losing balance and all of that but when they go to Dalcroze classes there is scientific evidence that’s showing that that’s not necessarily reversing but it’s keeping it from getting worse, which is really huge.

We can see applications to dancers. We see lots of applications more in Europe than in the United States but for stage actors and people that are doing theater, musical theater for certain. So there are so many different ways that you can go with this method now, which I think is really powerful.

Christopher: Yeah. Fascinating. I think there’s clearly a lot packed in there and I think we’ll definitely have to include some videos in the show notes of plastique anime and other aspects of Dalcroze so the people can see it in action. I wonder, could you paint a picture for us of not before and after but with and without Dalcroze? If we take, say, an 18-year-old pianist who’s been studying piano and his identical twin has done the same but with Dalcroze training alongside, what would those two different musicians look like? How would they be different?

Jeremy: Well, okay. So if I’m going to be completely honest, and I will be, I need to say this first and foremost, that Dalcroze isn’t for everyone. Do you know what I mean? I think that we would be remiss to think that there is such a thing as a method that works for everyone. You can imagine that if we’re moving and we’re using the body that for some people this is going to make them feel uncomfortable for any number of different reasons and so I think that I just have to say that this is kind of personal and that’s the blessing and the curse of this method, is that it can be so individual but what I can tell you is this, is that I teach a course in Dalcroze at Hope College in Holland, Michigan and every semester I get students that say, “I so wish I would have had this when I was a freshman,” because I’m usually teaching juniors and seniors at this point, sometimes some sophomores but almost all of them will say that at some point and especially when we start talking about meter and we start talking about things like polyrhythms and polymetric relationships like three against four or things like that, or syncopation, things that when you experience it in your body it’s such a different feeling than when it’s just in your hands or just at your instrument and so I think that what I would say is that a student that has had this experience is going to have more information to draw upon when looking at a piece of music. They might look at a short-short-long pattern and they might feel it in a different way because they remember that when you step short-short-long that the steps are shorter on the short and they take up more space on the longs and so there is this energy transfer of short-short-long, short-short-long and as you go into the long that energy has to transfer and shift.

Well, let’s take the piano for an example. If you play that on the piano, once you press the key down it’s over. You press the key down, there’s nothing more you can do to the sound, really. It’s done. And so how you approach it is 100% key to whether or not you make a musical sound. Now we can go into all sorts of detail about the angle of the thumb and the angle of the hand and the velocity of the finger and which knuckle is going to produce this tension and, you know, the descent into the key, etcetera, but at the end of the day it’s about feeling. What does it feel like? What does that rhythm feel like? What does it sound like in your inner ear and how can I create that? I feel like that college freshman is going to understand that component in a way that might be indescribable to the other. In other words, he’s gonna have more ways of knowing and I think that more ways of knowing is very powerful especially in today’s day and age.

Christopher: I love that and I think — I am sure it resonates with a lot of our listeners because I think we all have that feeling that music should be kind of natural and intuitive and something you feel but if it doesn’t happen for you automatically from birth then it can be a bit intimidating or frustrating or disappointing and I love how you’ve described it there that this is something that you can learn and you can develop the sense and if you study it in the right way you can gain that kind of physical instinct for how to express yourself in music.

Jeremy: I totally agree. For me talent is a four letter word. I think it’s — it really is, it’s tricky. And that’s not to say that there aren’t people that have a disposition towards a natural inclination towards X, Y, or Z but I think that we use that word in such a damaging way often. You know, terrible self-talk and the fact of the matter is there are lots of really, really quote, talented people out there that are not working that are not able-bodied musicians in the world because they don’t work hard and I think that hard work and dedication and all of those kinds of things give us way more, or pay us more dividends than any, you know, four-letter talent word ever will but what I think is very cool about this, Dalcroze, I think it does it in a joyful way which I think is really, really marvelous, you know, whether or not it’s the type of games that we play, the ways that we are responding to music that are very, very different and using the aural stimulus as a means to create change in the classroom, it’s just fun. You will inevitably pass a good Dalcroze class and see, you know, 12 to 15 adults smiling and skipping around the room and that, to me, is just marvelous, you know, and then if they can take that and make it a musical application that makes their life richer, oh, that’s where it’s at.

Christopher: Amazing. I want to ask you something that may be too big or too complicated a question to tackle in a short podcast interview so you can tell me if it is but I’m sure a lot of our listeners have heard of Dalcroze and the kinds of activities we’ve been talking about, things like rhythm activities, solfège exercises and so on and they’ve probably also heard of Kodály and Orff and these may all be a bit of a jumble to them. So I was wondering if you can explain what sets those three apart or what sets Dalcroze apart from Kodály and Orff in terms of what they have in common or what their strengths and weaknesses are.

Jeremy: Sure, I’ll do my best. I think that before I say anything I need to preface this with the fact that all of these learning modalities are really dependent on the teacher and the region of the world in which they are taught so what I’m about to say I think will hold true in many cases but maybe not all so I don’t want to try to speak for a community that is really, really diverse and rich in a way that would be limiting but when introduce Dalcroze to people that don’t know anything about it I explain it as, “Dalcroze education is an experiential way of knowing music through the body,” and so in that short statement we are saying that the body is gonna be the focus and that music is gonna be our driving force and that the goal is going to be to learn more and to know music in a different way but through a physical means.

If you go and study in a Kodály classroom, they may well do movement but the goal is different and in a sense that their job may or may not be really to physicalize the sound, not to embody it. That’s not necessarily their M.O. I think that in a Kodály classroom, the focus is on the human voice and the voice is the primary instrument. On the contrary, I would say in Dalcroze the body is the musical instrument. The body is the primary instrument. That’s what we’re dealing with and in Kodály the voice is.

In Orff, it’s tricky because Orff is kind of a combination of some elements of Kodály and some elements of Dalcroze. Dalcroze was essentially the founding father of all music education so it really is the root of these two other methods in many ways. They stem from him. They didn’t study directly with them or anything like that but Dalcroze’s reach in Europe was pretty pronounced so Dalcroze had this corporeal understanding, this bodily understanding. There was also a lot of focus on improvisation and solfège and ear training but it was kind of different.

Kodály is all about the voice and that element and Orff kind of combined those two together but focused it using instruments, so let’s say, using marimbas or xylophones or glockenspiels and that sort of thing so even that, just to say that is a little bit limiting but I think that many Orf people would agree with me in that sense but he also used recorders and all kinds of other instruments besides just pitched percussion. But that’s their focus and they are very, very heavy on improvisation in what they do. But it’s different than our improvisation, which I think is interesting.

But what unites us is that — especially in the United States — is that we’re all really focused on teaching music and we want our students to be musical and we want all children to have access to this and we want all adults to have access to this type of joyful way of understanding music.

The other thing that separates us, though, that I will just talk about, two things. Number one is that Dalcroze remains to this day the only modern method of music education that was designed for professional students, for adults, so it did not start with children.

It started with students at the Conservatoire de Geneve and so, and this is in the late 1800’s, early 1900’s is when Dalcroze was there, and, you know, Liszt died in 1886. Liszt was on faculty at the Conservatoire de Geneve at that, you know, right before that time and this was like, Dalcroze studied with Foret and Piaget and all these huge figures to create his method but it was not designed for children and it wasn’t until much later that he thought, “Well, I need to start earlier because this isn’t working the way I want it to.” So there’s that.

And then I think the other thing that makes us a little bit different than the other two is that we really championed fixed do solfège. That’s something that we really uphold, especially because we are in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, that’s just what we’re gonna use. If you go to Italy, Spain, France, they all are going to use fixed do.

However, Dalcroze actually was very, very focused on the relative pitch relationships in solfège training so he used numbers and he had students sitting on numbers and if you look at his books you can discover this. The thing that makes it tricky is in his books he writes them in Roman numerals which makes people think it’s talking about harmony but it’s not. It’s talking about pitches and so that’s something that I think is really powerful. So now at the Dalcroze School of the Rockies, because I live totally in Orff and Kodály country out here in Colorado, I have all my students singing on numbers and I also have them sing in letter names. So they do both pitch and function. They do fixed system and they do a numeral system.

And not to complicate any of this but if you study at the Kodály Institute in Hungary, if you study there, what’s really fascinating to me is that, yes, they are movable solfège, yes, they’re allowed bass minor, but all of their students sing on letter names and that’s something people don’t know and I think that’s — oftentimes they don’t know and I kind of think that’s really fascinating and I think that the idea that — you have to have both. If you have just function that does not necessarily have the same weight as when you are talking about the pitches that you’re singing and that’s what fixed do solfège is all about. If you call it do or you call it C, I don’t care. It doesn’t matter to me. Whatever makes the most sense to you, as long as you’re naming it is what matters.

Christopher: Thank you. That was a phenomenal explanation of the three camps and I appreciate that you made clear there that, you know, it’s not set in stone. Each of these methods have different interpretations and different practitioners but I think the way you explained it there will really help people to understand the strength of each or the focus of each and I love how you just explained fixed or mutable do or, you know, the different approaches to solfège because it trips so many people up and as you say, you know, there is a value in a fixed system and for some people that’s letter names, we’ll call them C, D, and E, and in parts of Europe that’s fixed do, it’s do-re-mi. And there’s a value to the relative system, and whether you call that do-re-mi or 1, 2, and 3, they give you a different perspective on the same thing and I don’t know, I get tired sometimes of the religious arguments you sometimes stumble into, particularly online, where people are fighting for fixed do versus mutable do and the reality is they’re completely different systems, you know? It’s like comparing apples and oranges and trying to convince someone one is better than the other.

Jeremy: Well, and they both serve different purposes, I think, and I, too, am exhausted by these debates that happen. I always bring it up when I’m teaching in my summer programs or when I’m teaching in my year-round program to first year and even second-year solfège students in my adult program because I want them to be well-versed to understand why is there a debate and why is it in my opinion kind of a waste of energy because the fact of the matter is you need both. You just do. I think any musician that really wants to delve into music in all of its expressive and structural capacities needs to have an understanding of where they are in the scale if they’re looking at total music but if they don’t know what that pitch is, it doesn’t matter, they can’t play it, you know? So I don’t know. It’s funny.

Christopher: So there’s something you mentioned to me when we were talking before we started recording was daily solfège devotionals. I’d love for you to explain a bit about that and what this looks like in practice if your students are thinking both in mutable and fixed do.

Jeremy: So it doesn’t matter if you’re six years old at my school or if you’re seventy-six at my school. You always will sing on numbers and you’ll sing on letter names so long as you’re dealing with music that’s not modulating. So for me it is about planting little ear worms for students and daily solfège devotionals for me is, like, let’s say, little songs or something like that that I might write, that I might compose for my students that teaches them something that is unique or that’s powerful and what ends up happening is that that ear worm, that little tune sort of digs in and then when they’re waiting at the bus stop or if they are waiting at the doctor’s office or, you know, they just have a little bit of downtime during their shower this tune’s gonna come into their ear and that way they can be practicing their solfège on numbers, on letters , however they need to in that moment but they don’t actually have to say, “I’m practicing it.” I’m not actually sitting down doing Dalcroze or solfège practice but they are practicing when that don’t think that they are. They are making it a part of their daily life which to me, is, that’s the whole point of devotional is to make some point of tranquility and I don’t know, calm in your life when you something that’s richer and to me this is the same thing, you know, and it doesn’t matter if it’s a chord samba to teach all the different inversions or the Neopolitan Boat Song that teaches all front of the scale degrees or the Neopolitan or, like, a tango that teaches the different augmented sixth chords. All of that kind of stuff it plants in their ear and then they can use it whenever they want.

Christopher: I love that. It reminds me of a fun discussion we’ve had inside Musical U recently where some of our members who were working on solfa were challenging each other to come up with a solfa for Christmas carols because when that song gets stuck in your head, you may as well use it for music practice.

Jeremy: This is exactly my point. To a lot of my students who are teachers, I will say to them, “Whenever you’re working with your students, sing. Sing the melodies. Sing the bass lines. Sing it on numbers. Sing it on letters. Encourage your kids to do it, because the more you do it the more they’re gonna do it,” and so then solfège becomes a part of your daily life, in that way. So yes.

Christopher: Would you mind, could you give us an example of one of these devotionals that one of your students might be humming or singing to themselves in their head?

Jeremy: Sure. So, yeah. I’ll just sing it. Is it okay if I just sing it?

Christopher: For sure.

Jeremy: Is that good? So I might do, “Sing with me one of my tricks. Here we go four flat to flat six. Now we’re done, the Neopolitan.” So this is talking about the Neopolitan six chord and how it works in the course of musical function, you know, it happens as we lead towards the cadence and what are the notes involved? You gotta get the flat two and you and you also have to do the flat six and it starts with four even though I arpeggiated down and up, but that’s the goal, is to get the four because it’s in first inversion and I think that it’s kind of fun because as soon as that gets in the student’s ear (snaps fingers) they’re set. Do you know what I mean?

Christopher: I love that. That’s fantastic because they’re gonna both be better able to spot that when they hear it in real music and they’re reminding themselves constantly of the theory behind it.

Jeremy: Well, right, and I think that in the course of a tune when you get there, when you get to this flat two, it’s sort of like the sun comes out, you know, it’s this really blossoming moment and in order to be able to sing it you really have to have internalized that. You have to really get it into your body. You have to sense that and oftentimes when a Neapolitan comes out in classical repertoire that’s how it happens. It happens in this way that’s sort of magical and, like, I think of the opening of — oh, Opus — Beethoven’s Sonata, the Appassionata — Opus 57 — no, no — yeah, 57, I think — because in that piece, you know, he starts in this F minor chord and then all of a sudden, you know, the Neopolitan comes out and it’s so shocking and yet so wonderful. It’s lovely.

Christopher: So something you said there that is really fascinating to me and which I must admit I was not really aware before is that Dalcroze really wasn’t designed for children to begin with. I think because I’m a bit more familiar with Kodály I think of Dalcroze in the same camp as being, you know, children first and then the adults can tag along. I’d love to hear, what does Dalcroze look like, if you have, say, a middle-aged person come to you who’s been learning an instrument for a bunch of years and is curious about Dalcroze, what kinds of things do you have them doing and how is that rewarding for them as a musician?

Jeremy: Well, the way that it’s structured at my school is that we have classes for students who are interested in adult enrichment. So these are students, they could be adult amateurs but they could be professionals but they just want to find new ways of learning music or knowing music through their body. They want to explore that movement component and so oftentimes the classes that I would teach for professionals would be the same that it would look like for a non-professional because even if a professional knows what they’re doing, they know, they don’t know it with their body, you know? They may know it in terms of, from the neck up. They don’t know it from the neck down and so a lot of those activities that I described to you before that would be something that we might do but I’m also a huge fan of using material in class so, like, for instance I might do a changing meter activity where we find ways to demonstrate, let’s say, meters of four and three and compare them to one another using a ball.

So you might do a, like, a bounce-catch-catch, bounce-catch-catch or bounce-catch-toss-catch, bounce-catch-toss-catch, etcetera. If we do things that are like that then it gives them this sense of what does the meter feel like, what is the shape of the measure, which is something that I never really had talked about until I was in a Dalcroze environment because measure shape is really huge. It’s what gives us the sense of forward motion in a phrase in many ways and so I think that students can take that.

We might work on particular patterns, let’s say, like a short-short-long or a long-short-short or syncopated patterns like short-long, short-short-long-short or offbeat patterns like bum-bum-bum-bah,bah-deet-dah-dah-dah, and put those in our body, give ourselves ways of physicalizing that and the goal is so that we, at the end of the class, we arrive at a piece of music and it could be, like, for piano, it could be vocal, it could be for the violin, it could be anything but then we move through that piece of music and we explore the details of that piece of music and by doing that we give these students a different perspective. They kind of really go deeply into a subject.

Oftentimes when I’m teaching these kinds of classes I focus to one particular subject in a class. Like, I don’t do a hodgepodge of different things and since the classes are usually about 90 minutes. I mean, 90 minutes on syncopation, you can get a lot done, you know, you really can. You can really go into a very deep place and then the goal would be that they, after they’ve seen it in this piece of music that we’ve explored in class that when they’re looking at another piece of music that they’re playing, that they’re like, “Oh, oh, I did that. I did that. I put that in my body. That’s what that is. That’s that anthabrak rhythm,” or whatever, and it’s — do you know what I mean? So I think that’s, kind of, is very useful for them.

Christopher: Fantastic, and I love the way — I love the word you used to describe that enrichment, because I think that that characterizes it so nicely. It’s not something just for beginners, it’s not something just for the more advanced. It’s something that adds a whole new dimension, I think, to everything you’ve been studying in music. Very cool. So I’m sure a lot of our listeners at this point are super curious and intrigued and wanting to know more about Dalcroze. Can you tell us the best way to get involved, maybe for the adult musician and for the adult who has a child who is learning music? What are the best avenues for them to get involved in Dalcroze?

Jeremy: Well, it all depends on where you live, but the first stop would be at www.dalcrozeusa.org . So that’s our national website for the Dalcroze Society of America and you can find all sorts of information there and resources and you can find out about programs that might be offered in your area. You can always visit my website which is www.dalcrozeschooloftherockies.com. So that’s a place where you could go and on that website you would find, like, youth programs and adult programs and links and there is a whole link that’s all about us and there you can find videos and all kinds of examples of things and literature that kind of goes into detail, like, what does a rhythmic solfège class look like for six-year-olds and what does it look like once they’re twelve, you know, just so you could see what that material would be. And once you go to those two websites, if you go there, that would give you a lot of information and more places to contact to find out about Dalcroze in your area.

Christopher: Terrific. Well, we’ll definitely have links to those as well as the videos we mentioned earlier in the show notes for this episode. Thank you so much, Jeremy. It’s been such a pleasure to hear more about your own journey and the Dalcroze School of the Rockies and Dalcroze in general. Thank you for joining us today.

Jeremy: Thank you. It’s been a pleasure.

Enjoying the show? Please consider rating and reviewing it!

The post More Ways of Knowing Music, with Jeremy Dittus appeared first on Musical U.

Becoming a musician means much more than just learning to…

https://www.musical-u.com/learn/5-key-skills-musical/
Becoming a musician means much more than just learning to play an instrument. There are a wide variety of skills involved in learning to become a capable and versatile musician beyond mechanical abilities and understanding music theory. Here are the five core skills of musicianship from Dr. Chad West. https://www.musical-u.com/learn/5-key-skills-musical/

Singing in different genres can increase your vocal abili…

https://www.musical-u.com/learn/how-to-pick-the-perfect-song-to-fit-your-voice-5-tips/
Singing in different genres can increase your vocal abilities and opportunities, but how do you know which styles best suit your own voice? It can take some time to figure out what songs will sound and feel really good with your own natural voice. If you keep in mind the five tips below, your voice will stay healthy while you’re learning and growing in your identity as a singer. https://www.musical-u.com/learn/how-to-pick-the-perfect-song-to-fit-your-voice-5-tips/

What makes a truly great musician? While people will ofte…

https://www.musical-u.com/learn/talent-myth-talent-important-musician/
What makes a truly great musician? While people will often say “they’re so talented”, talent is highly overrated in what helped them develop their musicality Learn more about the secret to developing your musicianship. 🎶 https://www.musical-u.com/learn/talent-myth-talent-important-musician/

Raise the Fifth! Listening for Augmented Triads

Looking for a harmonically ambiguous chord to add a little mystery to your band’s latest hit single? Or maybe you are listening to a favorite tune and are jarred by a pretty bizarre harmony starring an augmented fifth? Look no further than the rarely used and incredibly underappreciated augmented chord.

From David Bowie to the Beatles, and even a little Broadway, the augmented triad is like that one wacky cousin that no one talks about, but you can’t help liking once you get to know him!

C augmented chord

Hearing Augmented

This interesting chord built on two major triads provides a very unique sound that does not occur naturally in the diatonic scale. This triad is often used to create ambiguity and atonality in a work by functioning as a substitute dominant, or is found in the harmonic minor scale as the chord built on the third degree of the scale. Since many of our favorite tunes stubbornly and consistently stay harmonically simple by sticking to four basic chords, adding in the augmented triad brings a bit of interesting flavor to a song.

The Beatles, well known for their harmonic experimentation, have a few tunes that delve into the augmented realm. “All My Loving” is an excellent example, with augmented chords in the chorus (first time at [0:54]):

However, most contemporary popular songs use the augmented chord sparingly, if at all. You will find these more complex harmonies in the rock songs of earlier years and peppered throughout jazz and blues.

In Leslie Gore’s “It’s My Party”, the augmented triad is featured prominently under “cry if I want to” in the chorus. The “+” means “augmented” and is used interchangeably with “aug”. Both will be used in this article, and you will see both in lead sheets. Listen for the augmented chords at [0:08] and all the other choruses:

A
It’s my party and I’ll
A+
Cry if I want to, Cry
D
If I want to cry
Dm
If I want to

You can hear this augmented chord progression here:

chord progression for "it's my party"

Building the Augmented Triad

How do you create the augmented triad? Is it crazy difficult?

No, for all its atonal ambiguity, the augmented triad is simple.

Start with a major third:

major third interval

Once you have your major third, build another major third on top:

c augmented chord

The result is two major thirds stacked on top of each other, and an augmented fifth interval between the bottom and the top notes.

Need more help learning how to build an augmented chord? Then check out this quick and easy tutorial by PianoGuyTV. Watch as he plays augmented chords on the piano. As you watch, listen for the very distinct augmented sound.

Now listen to the augmented triad a few times:

What makes this unique sound? This sound differs from the familiar sounds of a major triad and a minor triad. Listen to the augmented triad compared to the major and minor triads:

major vs minor vs augmented

Typically, when we are listening to the chord progressions of our favorite Top 40 tunes, the chords contain either a perfect fifth interval (as in major and minor chords), or occasionally a diminished fifth interval (as in diminished chords). This helps the chord progression move forward, notably in familiar chord progressions like I-IV-V-I or I-V-vi-I.

However, the augmented triad has an augmented, or raised, fifth:

augmented fifth interval

The raised fifth gives the song a definite harmonically-ambiguous, almost “spacey” type of sound.

Augmented Singing Practice

In this simple exercise, you will practice singing the augmented triad and use your ear training skills.

1. Listen to the augmented triad example below a few times:

G augmented chord

2. Listen to the augmented fifth:

augmented fifth interval

3. Sing the augmented fifth with the practice track:

4. Listen to the arpeggiated augmented triad:

arpeggiated g augmented chord

5. Sing with the arpeggiated example (notice that it goes for two octaves)

Learn How to Pick out the Augmented Triad

In our previous article about diminished triads, we touched upon three different ways to hear the diminished chord in a chord progression:

  1. Learning by rote
  2. Learning by arpeggiation and audiation
  3. Listening to chord quality

Depending on your instrument or voice type and musical training, you may find one way easier than another. Most musicians find that the third way, learning a chord through sounds associated with a specific chord quality, is the quickest and easiest way to learn a chord, especially a chord as distinct as the augmented triad. But we’ll chat about all three methods here.

1. Learning By Rote

Learning how to distinguish between chords by rote is very easy for musicians that play harmonic instruments like keyboards or piano, mallet instruments, and guitar. Because they play chords on a regular basis, many times the unique sound of a chord is easily memorized. Jazz players have the biggest advantage when it comes to recognizing augmented triads since the jazz and blues often delve much deeper into complex harmonic vocabulary than most pop music styles.

For instrumentalists like drummers, trumpet or saxophone players, or even singers, because they focus primarily on rhythm or melody when they play, being able to recognize a chord on the first listen by ear can be very difficult. In fact, it’s very well-known that while percussionists have an almost insane and uncanny ability to quickly repeat numerous dizzying difficult polyrhythms, they often struggle with harmony.

Singers or melodic instrumentalists might also struggle with listening for unusual chords, although harmonic ear training exercises are often part of their musical training.

To learn the augmented triad by rote, you would listen and play the augmented triad on a regular basis, internalizing the sound.

 →Learn more about triads and chord progressions.

Augmented Triad Practice

  1. Listen to the augmented triad
  2. Play the chord on a keyboard instrument or guitar
  3. Practice the chord within a chord progression
  4. Repeat practice on a daily basis

G augmented chord progression

If you would like to learn more about how an augmented chord works in a standard chord progression, check out this easy piano tutorial with Piano Lesson with Warren. Practice along and learn how the augmented chord functions as a passing tone and more. This piano tutorial also discusses using diminished chords.

2. Learning By Arpeggiation

Learning a chord through arpeggiation usually involves some training in singing, like using solfege. Many singers are very familiar with using solfege (a system of assigning syllables to specific notes) when they learn music theory and ear training skills.

If you’re already familiar with solfege, you can use this when learning how to sing and recognize an augmented chord. If you are unfamiliar with singing solfege, simply sing on “La”.

  1. Listen to the chord and arpeggio
  2. Sing along with the arpeggiated chord
  3. Practice singing the chord without the audio
  4. Transpose to other keys

arpeggiated g augmented chord

While this method of learning a chord via arpeggiation is helpful in more advanced ear training, most of the time a musician may be trying to simply figure out the chord progressions to their favorite songs. In that case, this is not the most helpful method.

3. Learning by Chord Quality

What is chord quality? Specifically, it is identifying a chord based on whether it is major, minor, augmented, diminished, etc. Musicians often attribute a specific “sound” related to color, timbre, or even feeling, to each chord. While this is not the most scientific way of identifying a chord, it is often the simplest.

In David Bowie’s “Life on Mars?”, the use of the augmented chord adds a sinister oddness to the song in the pre-chorus ([0:37] and [0:45]) and chorus ([0:58], [1:14], and [1:26]):

Ab          E+
But the film is a saddening bore
G#7
For she’s lived it ten times or more
C#              A+
She could spit in the eyes of fools

If you have played music for any length of time, you are probably aware that most pop songs sound “happy” because they stay in the major scale. On a very elemental level, we have attributed feelings to specific scales, chords, and intervals in western harmony. Interestingly enough, these societal emotional attributions to pitch do not necessarily translate well to other cultures, but they work well for our purposes here.

For example, listen to the major chord compared to the augmented chord below:

c major chord vs c augmented chord

Ask yourself the following questions:

  1. How did the major chord sound compare to the augmented chord?
  2. What timbres, tone qualities, or even feelings did you feel when listening to the major chord? The augmented chord?
  3. Which chord would be considered “happy”?
  4. Which chord do you hear most often?
  5. Which chord seems more harmonically ambiguous? Why?

Now compare the augmented chord to the minor chord:

c minor chord vs c augmented chord

Ask yourself:

  1. How did the minor chord sound compare to the augmented chord?
  2. What timbres, tone qualities, or even feelings did you feel when listening to the minor chord? The augmented chord?
  3. What feelings would you assign the minor chord? The augmented chord? Why?
  4. Which chord do you hear most often in popular music or even film music?

Learning how to compare different types of chords in relation to each other is one way to identify which chord is the augmented chord in a progression.

In Cabaret’s “Maybe this Time”, you can hear how the augmented chords are used to transition stepwise and build into the lines “I’ll be lucky” [0:15] and “For the first time” [0:27]:

This popular Broadway song demonstrates just one way that you might use the augmented triad. Because the song has very distinct jazz flavor, there is a rich harmonic palette for the listener to enjoy.

The Beatles once again master the augmented chord on their song “From Me to You”. Notice how the song harmonically builds starting on “I got arms that long to hold you”, culminating with characteristic Beatles harmony on the augmented chord on “satisfied” [0:47]:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvJbfM304o0

A Little Bit of Listening Practice

Check out the example below. You want to practice listening for the augmented chord sound. These examples are based on popular musical examples that we have listened to already.

For each of the musical examples:

  1. Listen to the chord progression a few times
  2. After you listen to the chord progression, try to identify which chords are augmented
  3. Check your answers below

Example 1:

Show answer

C – F – D7 – G – G+
The Beatles augmented chords

Example 2:

Show answer

Bb – Gm – G+ – Eb- G7
Life on mars david bowie augmented chords

Click here to learn more

How did you do? Were you able to identify the augmented triad in the chord progression?

If not, don’t worry. Developing an ear for chords takes practice. Keep listening to the examples above, play along with your instrument, and start adding in augmented triads when you jam with your friends. Because the augmented chord can substitute easily for a dominant chord, you might find that it is actually fun to change up your sound with a little raised fifth.

Enhance Through Augmentation!

While you probably won’t encounter the augmented triad too often in the Top 40 hits on the radio, you can learn how to use augmented chords in your playing to great effect.

Take a cue from David Bowie and experiment with placing augmented chords strategically to give your chord progressions that spacey, almost supernatural feel, or make like the Beatles and use the augmented chord for harmonic experimentation.

Practice the ear training method that works best for you to learn how to listen for augmented triads in music. Practice makes perfect (or at least a little better) so enjoy the singular strangeness of the augmented triad and rock on!

The post Raise the Fifth! Listening for Augmented Triads appeared first on Musical U.

Who wouldn’t prefer a robot to a live drummer? After all,…

https://www.musical-u.com/learn/human-drummers-drum-machines/
Who wouldn’t prefer a robot to a live drummer? After all, computers have the ability to create flawless, technically-perfect rhythms. As it turns out, people are actually attracted to songs created by humans because of the minuscule flaws they contain. https://www.musical-u.com/learn/human-drummers-drum-machines/

Steve Nixon from FreeJazzLessons.com has already toured t…

https://www.musical-u.com/learn/free-jazz-lessons-with-steve-nixon/
Steve Nixon from FreeJazzLessons.com has already toured the world with legends like B.B. King and Buddy Guy. Not to be content, he set his sights on YouTube and wound up with 65,000 students per month watching his videos. Sit down with Steve and learn more about how he developed as a musician in this interview. https://www.musical-u.com/learn/free-jazz-lessons-with-steve-nixon/