Miles Davis was not primarily a mentor. He was difficult, demanding, and often unkind — Keith Jarrett, who played in the band from 1970 to 1971, has described the working conditions as grueling to the musicians who worked with him. He fired people with little notice. Philly Joe Jones, Red Garland, and Bill Evans all departed under strained circumstances. He did not explain his artistic decisions. He expected musicians to figure out what he wanted by watching him rather than by asking.
And yet the list of musicians who credit him with the most formative experience of their development is extraordinary: John Coltrane, Cannonball Adderley, Bill Evans, Wayne Shorter, Herbie Hancock, Tony Williams, Chick Corea, Keith Jarrett. According to the Library of Congress jazz archives, the list continues. Every musician who passed through his bands describes leaving with something irreplaceable.
What he gave them was not technique — they all arrived with better technique than most musicians ever develop. What he gave them was a method of thinking about music.
What Was Miles Offering That No One Else Could?
Miles Davis’s method, distilled: play what the music needs, not what you know how to play. Do not demonstrate your technique. Do not fill space. Listen to what is happening around you, find the note or phrase or silence that the moment requires, and provide exactly that.
This sounds simple. It is not. The tendency of highly trained musicians is to play what they have practiced — to deploy the patterns they have developed, to demonstrate their vocabulary. Davis recognized this tendency as the enemy of musical truth and spent his career and his leadership fighting it.
The famous story about his direction to Bill Evans during the Kind of Blue sessions — “don’t play the butter notes” — is a version of this method. Evans had been trained in a classical-influenced jazz piano tradition that favored complete harmonic expression. Davis wanted him to leave gaps, to imply rather than state, to trust the listener to fill in what the music did not articulate. The instruction was musical and also philosophical: restraint as a form of respect.
The Philosophy Behind Restraint
Davis believed that every note a musician played was a choice, and every choice mattered. When a pianist filled every moment with harmonic color, they were making a statement about music that Davis rejected. He wanted his musicians to understand that silence had content. Space had meaning. A musician who could hold back was making a more powerful statement than one who filled every available moment.
This philosophy emerged from Davis’s own playing style. He had never been the fastest trumpet player in jazz, nor the most technically ambitious. His genius lay in selectivity. His solos on early recordings showed a musician who understood that one perfectly placed note could say more than ten notes played in haste. He expected his sidemen to absorb this principle not through explanation but through osmosis — by playing alongside him night after night, paying attention to what he played and what he did not.
The Specific Instruction: Less Is Clarity
When Davis told Evans “don’t play the butter notes,” he was instructing him to eliminate the harmonic padding that classical training had taught him to provide. Butter notes were the safe choices, the things that sounded good because they were complete. Davis wanted Evans to think like a writer cutting unnecessary words from a sentence. What remains should be essential.
The remarkable thing is that Evans listened. On the Kind of Blue recordings, his playing became sparer, more architecturally thoughtful, and more beautiful as a result. He had brought one set of musical values to the studio and left with another. This was the real transmission — not a technique, but a recalibration of values.
How Did Each Musician Transform Under Davis’s Approach?
John Coltrane: Permission to Search
John Coltrane joined the first great quintet in 1955, already a developed musician with a distinctive voice. What he got from Davis was not musical vocabulary but permission — specifically, the permission to take as long as he needed to find what he was looking for.
Davis’s famous characterization of Coltrane’s early solos as “sheets of sound” captures both the excess and the necessity of what Coltrane was doing. He was searching for something and playing through the material rather than to it. A typical bandleader would have told Coltrane to tighten up, to shape his ideas more efficiently, to get to the point. Davis tolerated this, and his tolerance was a gift.
Coltrane left the quintet in 1959 having found what he was looking for, which became A Love Supreme. The album is in many ways the answer to the question Coltrane had been asking during those years with Davis. He had spent four years experimenting, overplaying, searching, and Davis had given him the space to do it without judgment. That kind of patience from a bandleader is rare.
Wayne Shorter: Bridging Composition and Improvisation
Wayne Shorter joined the second great quintet in 1964 as the quintet’s primary composer and tenor voice. Davis had been looking for a certain quality in a saxophonist for years — someone who could write with the harmonic sophistication of Thelonious Monk but play with the physical urgency of the hard bop tradition. Shorter could do both.
What Davis gave Shorter was a context in which compositional sophistication and improvisational freedom were not in tension. The second quintet played Shorter’s compositions in ways that were formally precise and harmonically open simultaneously. Shorter left in 1970 to co-found Weather Report, and his work there extended the methods he had developed in the Miles context across the following two decades.
The collaboration between Davis and Shorter created a template for how a bandleader could work with a composer-performer. Shorter’s compositions gave the band structural scaffolding, but within that structure, Davis allowed the musicians to move with complete freedom. This balance — structure and freedom — became one of the defining features of the second quintet.
Herbie Hancock: Responsive Accompaniment
Herbie Hancock joined the second quintet in 1963 at twenty-two. He arrived as a virtuosic hard bop pianist. He left five years later as a musician whose harmonic language had expanded beyond anything his former employer could contain.
Davis’s instruction to Hancock was consistent: respond to what is happening rather than providing a predetermined harmonic accompaniment. Hancock developed a comping style that was reactive rather than programmatic — he listened to the soloist and provided harmonic suggestions rather than harmonic statements, which gave the soloist more freedom and the ensemble more suppleness.
The results are audible on recordings from this period. Hancock’s accompaniment became sparer and more attentive. He began to anticipate where a soloist was heading and provide harmonic colors that supported the direction of the solo rather than the predetermined harmonic structure. This approach to accompaniment became a hallmark of his own music later in his career.
Tony Williams: Space for Rhythmic Exploration
The youngest member of the second quintet — Williams was seventeen when he joined — Williams’s presence in the ensemble was immediately transformative. He played with a rhythmic freedom that had not been common in jazz drumming: he could displace the beat, suggest multiple tempos simultaneously, and create a rhythmic environment that was simultaneously destabilizing and deeply swinging.
Davis hired him because Williams was doing something nobody else was doing. He then gave him space to do it, which is arguably the most important thing a bandleader can do with a musician of Williams’s quality. Rather than trying to reign Williams in or make him more conventional, Davis encouraged him to develop this unique language further.
What Does It Mean to Lead This Way?
Creating Discomfort as a Teaching Tool
Davis understood intuitively what many educators learn slowly: discomfort is the engine of growth. By hiring musicians who challenged him and then refusing to guide them in obvious directions, Davis created an environment where players had to develop their own solutions to the artistic problems they faced.
This approach was not kind in any conventional sense. Musicians in Davis’s bands described the experience as stressful. But stress and kindness are not opposites in the context of artistic development. The stress Davis created was pressure to grow, and that pressure was the most valuable gift he could offer.
The musicians who passed through Davis’s bands did not love him while they were there. Many of them were unhappy. But they left understanding music differently. They had been remade as musicians through the process of adapting to his demands.
The Unspoken Method
“He hired the best musicians in the world and then made them uncomfortable. That discomfort was the education.”
Davis rarely explained what he was doing or why. This silence was intentional. Musicians who constantly receive explanations can depend on verbal guidance. Musicians forced to figure things out develop more robust independent judgment. They learn to make decisions without waiting for approval. They become leaders themselves.
This method is nearly impossible to teach formally. You cannot write it down. You cannot explain it in a workshop. It requires a specific kind of sustained attention — a bandleader willing to stay present with musicians as they struggle, not to help them but simply to witness the struggle and occasionally remove obstacles from their path.
Who Built on Davis’s Method?
| Musician | Instrument | Years in Davis Band | Key Development |
|---|---|---|---|
| John Coltrane | Tenor saxophone | 1955-1959 | Permission to explore “sheets of sound” |
| Cannonball Adderley | Alto saxophone | 1957-1960 | Soul and bluesy directness |
| Bill Evans | Piano | 1958-1959 (sessions) | Harmonic restraint and space |
| Wayne Shorter | Tenor saxophone | 1964-1970 | Composition and free improvisation balance |
| Herbie Hancock | Piano | 1963-1968 | Responsive, reactive comping |
| Tony Williams | Drums | 1963-1969 | Rhythmic independence and freedom |
| Chick Corea | Piano | 1968-1970 | Fusion and electronic exploration |
After Davis, each of these musicians carried his method forward into their own bands. Coltrane’s later ensembles reflected the searching approach he had practiced with Davis. Hancock’s work as a bandleader prioritized giving soloists space and freedom. Williams’s leadership in bands like Lifetime maintained the rhythmic adventurousness he had developed in the second quintet. The method passed through these musicians and into the broader language of jazz.
What Did This Teaching Method Cost?
The approach Davis took came with real human costs. Musicians were stressed. Some were hurt by his coldness. Several described feeling uncertain about whether they had succeeded or failed in his bands — the lack of feedback meant they had to project their own sense of accomplishment or failure onto their playing.
The method also meant that Davis did not develop deep personal relationships with most of his musicians. He was a bandleader, not a friend. The emotional texture of his bands was one of professional intensity, not camaraderie. This created an atmosphere that was productive but never warm.
Yet despite these costs, the musicians kept coming. They knew what Davis was offering was rare. They knew that spending time in his organization would change them in ways that playing in other bands would not. The strangeness and difficulty of the experience became part of its value.
What Remains of This Method Today?
The direct lineage from Davis extends through the musicians who studied with him and then through the generations of musicians who studied with them. But the specific conditions that made Davis’s method possible are harder to replicate now. Contemporary musicians have access to endless instructional videos, published method books, and detailed explanations of every conceivable musical question.
The silence that was once necessary — the space where musicians had to figure things out — is harder to maintain. But the principle endures: excellent musicians grow when they are placed in situations that demand more of them than they have yet learned to provide. They grow when they are surrounded by musicians who are asking different questions. They grow when a bandleader understands that the real work is not in explaining but in creating the conditions under which growth becomes necessary.
Miles Davis’s genius as a bandleader was recognizing that the musicians he hired did not need lessons. They needed situations. They needed to be placed in an ensemble where their current habits were insufficient, where the challenge around them was constant, and where the bandleader trusted that they would find their way through. That trust was the essential ingredient, and it was almost entirely unspoken.
Explore more in our miles davis collection.
