Improvisation - in a musical sense - is what we do as players when we have to make things up; which is when the musical instructions regarding what to play and when are not nailed to the mast. There is always an element of spontaneity present when improvistion takes place; as opposed to the meditation that goes into carefully composed or arranged pieces of music created over a period of time. It certainly doesn't mean 'do what you like musically speaking, whenever you feel like it'. No, it isn't normally as 'free' as that though it is possible in a post-intellectual Dadaist world devoid of tradition or custom.
In other words, there are parameters that should guide the improviser.not so much: do whatever you like...and more...there are unspoken parameters, so do what you like within those. So yes, there are rules, which is another way of putting it: the rules are usually not discussed but understood; the evidence for which becomes clearer during the course of an improvisation.
These rules/parameters are bound up in distinct musical styles or languages and have evolved over time; passed on from one generation to the next. It is fair to say that in order to improvise, we must first understand a language - that of a musical style - and in doing so, we will know what the parameters are. There is no question that in learning a style, there is a certain amount of absorption and regurgitation through imitation. The same way that babies learn their mother tongue - through imitation. Note: it isn't by starting with the alphabet and how to construct sentences.
The same can be said of musical improvisation: we aborb styles, we learn what characteristes them, what defines them as distinct from another style; we learn the parameters...the rules.
And the good news is that all of this can pre-empt the necessity of learning chord-scale theory as perhaps prescribed by leading Conservatoires.
One can take a simple approach to improvisation that precedes all of the academic mumbo jumbo. All you have to do is listen, absorb...imitate.
In the course that bandskool is currently putting together, one of the aims is to show students how to improvise over specific tunes rather than offering a complete taxonomy on how to go about it in every circumstance: that would lead to a rather abstract and somewhat dry thesis. And yes, appeal will be made to the styles we are trying to improvise in - imitation and manipulation of an existing melody will be part of the approach; although theory does has it place.
It used to be that classically trained musicians did not learn to improvise - that instead their focus was on meeting the technical requirements of the composer's will. It used to be that a classically trained musician would feel uncomfortable about just improvising; and that is understandable. It is the realisation that it is not just about doing whatever one wants but going about it in a credible way that accords with the style one is attempting to improvise in. If you hadn't studied Swazili then would you be able to improvise a conversation in it? No, I don't think so!
