Many musicians, critics and music writers within our modern day music world express the strong need of a reprise of dialogue between composers and performers. This dialogue had been somehow lost for centuries in western music culture and only during the twentieth century started again, although many classical composers from the previous century contributed to maintain this separation clear. Are we definitely going towards a new conception of composing and performing? Theorists have been formulating new concepts on music making in western culture which seem to confirm this trend. Benson (2003) in particular stresses on the importance of improvisation as an activity in between composition and performance. Although there are many examples of contemporary musicians (composers and performers) who use improvisation as a main tool (or as a starting point) for making music, I will use Keith Jarrett’s case to show how an artist today can have different approaches to music making. Jarrett represents a performer who composes mainly through means of improvisation. Nonetheless, his vast production includes less-known written works for solo piano, ensembles and orchestra and performances of other’s works. He represents the case in which the separation line between improviser, composer and performer becomes very often blurred. Based on Jarrett’s case I will then explain three different types of approaching music. Within each approach improvisation has a different role, ranging from crucial to marginal. This new way of approaching music making is in accordance to the need of keeping the dialogue between composers and performers open. Finally the admittance of such a big role of improvisation in composition and performance will lead me to suggest a change of direction in today’s western music educational system, which is still very much rooted in the classic tradition and where improvisation is mainly related to jazz subjects.