>>"Real improvising musicians don't remember what they play. Many can play amazing combinations of phrases they remember, but its just a collage of clichés. It really starts where we play what we don't know ourselves. ... improvisation takes a lot of very quick thinking!"
** an interesting set of ideas.
i think that "improvisation" requires vocabulary and the means to use it. it's the same as conversation: if you don't have the ideas or words, you can't converse - - and if you don't have the wherewithal to deal with those components, it's likely that you will not be able to react to someone else's vocabulary and means . . . in other words, no real conversation of ideas.
indeed quick thinking is key, but it doesn't occur in a vacuum. one needs the tools and the practice to be able to think quickly and react to what is going on.
i'd say that pretty much any artistic endeavor by any artist is in danger of having its clichés - - sometimes it's called style and sometimes it's called limitation. what makes beethoven "beethoven"? what makes coltrane "coltrane"? it's their vocabulary - - or, more negatively, their clichés. i think you will find this with any artist. sometimes "cliché" is communication (?). (also consider that there are people who believe that certain intervals/voice leadings have specific emotive signals/weight.)
as far as improvising musicians not remembering what they played, or what other people played . . . i don't know if i agree with that. some of the best improvisers i know are able to sing what they or someone else did during an improv - - sometimes many days later. another way to look at this is if one is improvising form - - in other words, repeatable or recurring sections in an improvisation. it's awfully helpful to be able to remember what you or another played did in order to repeat and reshape a motif or texture in order to bring a "section" back around. in the improv.
it is nice to be able to do something one has never done before in an improvisation. but, my guess is, if we had to adhere to that as a prerequisite for doing any improv, most would have to stop right now!
i tend to think that improvisation means different things to different people: for some it means "jamming on rock tunes/jazz standards"; for some it means "total free playing"; for some it means "using written material for a jumping-off place"; for some it means "spontaneous composition."
for me, it predominately means the last three (depending on context), with the first happening less frequently. back to the conversation analogy - - one talks to different friends about different sorts of things.
an interesting sidelight - - and maybe one more in keeping with the topic of this list - - is how to use looping in improv. if one is looking for complete freedom and non-repetition (if that is one's definition) in improv, it seems that looping can hinder that "complete freedom." the very fact that something is looping in repetition can be a lock. of course, if one's idea is that improv is "spontaneous composition," looping does not necessarily need to have a negative effect - - it is part of the "composition."
stig