-
Hi everyone, I need enlightenment on Scales and modes that goes with the ii V I progression. Presently, I know my arpeggios over the ii V I progression. When I build lick or play the progression, I let the feelings of the the chords guide my choice of note, but I do find out the chord tones in the arpeggios cannot contain my expressions. But if I go out of the scope of the four notes can we still call that "playing arpeggios".
-
12-07-2010 11:20 AM
-
Well, sure, since you can re-describe any choice of notes as chord extensions. So on your "ii" d-minor, for instance, if you play an "e" you're just adding the 9th to the arpeggio.
The real question is whether that way of speaking is helpful or not. I think it can be helpful more often than not, but others find other ways of speaking more beneficial. So maybe it works better for you to talk about playing a Dorian scale over the "ii", and just seeing that scale as a pool of notes you paint with.
The schema you choose will influence how you play, but it might be more important to play with both ways of thinking to see what works for you. For me it's usually more helpful to think of extending chords rather than using modes. If I played more modal music, I'd switch my schema to a more "appropriate" schema for that style.
-
To answer your question about which modes go with a ii v I , that would be Dorian,Mixolydian and Ionian.However i believe this is over thinking , i would much rather highlight the chord tones and connect them using notes from the home key.It would take far too long to change modes on every chord by the time youd thought of them the progression would have passed.
-
Also, if you google "II-V-I" licks, you'll get lots of examples. You'll see how to extend from simple arpeggios, adding higher extensions, neighbor notes etc...
-
To answer your other point ,why would you want to only use the notes of the chord although there is no law against it ,it would soon become very dull. Remember arpeggios are used to highlight the chord tones but they can be connected with other tones as well.
-
Yes, in traditional jazz, you want your lick to be centered around the chord tones, but the scale tones (and chromatics) can be used to connect the chord ones. Yes, it would get pretty boring if all we played were chord tones. As the jazz idiom gets more "modern" you find people getting less and less attached to the chord tones.
But good players still reference them and it's a great place to start and to train your ears.
Peace,
Kevin
-
Here's some typical licks. Why not print it, grab some coloured markers and label notes as chord tones, passing notes, neighbors, etc...
-
Thanks to everyone that has contributed in answering my questions. But what of choice of scales over the ii V I prog. I've heard it said many times, that over a specific chord e.g. Maj7, min7, dim e.t.c. There are scales one can use, like pentatonic, bebop, e.t.c what has anyone got to give me on this.
-
The usual warning with scales is that you want to avoid sounding like you are just running up and down scales. With that in mind, these are the "vanilla" scales. It's always good to start simply!
Dmin7: D dorian (D E F G A B C D)
G7: G mixolydian (G A B C D E F G)
CMaj7: C ionian (major) (C D E F G A B C)
-
Bluesky im still not sure if you understand but all three modes in a major 251 contain the same notes as the major scale of the one chord.But as kevin will back me up on this dont fall into the trap of just thinking play c Major over a C major 251 you need to be trying to imply the chords with those chord tones,but from a theory point of viewyou are just playing the c major scale over all three chords,but as each chord passes by the notes of each chord become the important notes of the scale.If this still doesnt make sense to you then we need to cover some basic theory with you regarding scale and chord construction.So please tryand ask some specific questions so we know how we can help.
-
Listen to great solos and you can hear the chord changes implied in the solo. To do that you need to know you chord tones (arp's). Yes playing arp's can get vanilla same with running scales or modes. I would say start working on guide tone/target tone lines that way you can mix scales/modes and arp's. So for each chord target the 3rd's and/or 7ths of the chords.
To get your ear used to the sound comp the chords with two-note voicings of just the 3rd's and 7th's.
-
Thanks a bunch everyone. Gingerjazz, I absolutely got your your message, and it helps. Thanks to you bigdaddy, docbop, ksjazzguitar, and the rest of you. If you get any more resources that could be of help, I'll gladly take them.
-
I think a distinction needs to be made between playing arpeggios and using arpeggios to visualize the fretboard.
I am very much a "chord tones" guy, but that doesn't mean I'm limited to them. Chord tones (arpegggios, if you will) is my method of visualization. I like it because it cuts to the chase--it shows me the great "landing pads" and the rest is up to me to "fly the plane." Dig?
As for using scales or modes over a ii V I, they're all from the same key--so you can use the major scale of the I. This will encompass the notes of the Dorian (ii) mode and the Mixolydian (V). Chances are, you won't really hear the character of that mode because it will be moving by so quickly, and chances are that's actually one of the more "vanilla" approaches you can take....in other words--thinking dorian-mixolydian-ionian over a ii V I is a lot of work for a pretty basic sound.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Very good point!!!!
-
Definitely. Although practicing improvising with arpeggios can be a valuable tool to help you hear and see these important tones. But I would not base and entire soloing style around that - that would be very boring. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I'll just double down on the rest of what Beaumont said; I don't think I can say it any better. (sigh)
Peace,
Kevin
-
Well thanks, Kevin.
I know you and I are both "arpeggio mappers"--I to the point where I even superimpose arpeggios on a modal tune occasionally (something like "flamenco sketches," I hear and "see" chords there, without a doubt)
Are there times you find yourself thinking "scalar" or "modal?" Or better yet, practicing "scalar" or "modal,"-- I try to have the thinking done by the time I'm actually playing the damn tune!
(For the record OP--I do know my modes andI use them, but I feel they're a more advanced idea, and that they only serve to confuse and confound beginners when they try to apply them to something as neatly diatonic as a major ii V I.)
-
Well, I certainly practice scales. (I think that we often use the word "mode" incorrectly, but I'll save that "whining" for another time.) Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I certainly think of modes when I'm playing a modal tune. And I do use scales even in "normal" improvisation, especially on faster tunes. But they are more of a way to get from one scale tone to another. I guess there are sections where I step away from "chord tone" thinking, but I always come back to it. If I'm doing something fusiony, then I might think much more scalarly - but other than that I wouldn't say that I'm ever thinking purely chord/scale. I started out that way - like many - but eventually evolved beyond it.
Definitely. The point is to program it into you ears and your fingers so you don't have to think about it while you're playing. I want to be thinking about music while I'm playing, not math. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I definitely think it is a waste to be thinking "A Dorian, D Mixolydian, G Ionian" - you might as well be thinking "G Major" for the whole thing - you get the same result with less work. But I think that Beaumont and I agree that it is (subjectively) more musical to think "Gm7, C7, FMaj7" and use the appropriate scales to connect the chord tones. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Peace,
Kevin
-
I think Joe Pass, or someone else, say they highlight either the II OR the V over a II-V-I progression...not both. Does this make sense??
Thanks, Sailor
-
I think what you have heard is some with skip the II and start addressing the V. As Robben Ford says "it'll get there in a second anyway". Originally Posted by Sailor
-
Yeah, I've heard Pass say that he just thinks of the V7. Really, you can kind of the think of the ii7 as a kind of rootless V9sus, is you go through the notes. That suspension gives you the same guide tone b7-3 resolution.
If it is a 2-beat ii to a 2-beat V at a fast tempo, I might think this way. Or sometimes just for the sake of a substitution. But I wouldn't recommend doing it every time. But Joe says so and he's Joe, so it can't be too bad.
Doesn't Martino go the other way and think of it as ii? I can't remember, he gets me all twisted around.
Peace,
Kevin
-
Well yeah...that's what I'm seeing. Can II and V just be considered a tension prior to I?? Can we use the same scale over the II-V?? Seems crazy to think dorian mixo every time.
Sailor
-
I agree 100%. I don't see the point of thinking different scales for each chord unless they are truly different scales, like thinking Major for the whole thing but switching to the altered scale for the V7 chord. But if you are thinking the "vanilla" scale choices, thinking the parent major scale for the whole thing is a lot less work and gets you to the same answer. Originally Posted by Sailor
I guess people think that if they think Dorian for the ii, Mixolydian for the V, etc. - that they are going to bring out more flavor of the chords. But in my experience, it really doesn't work that way. If you want to bring out the flavor of the chords, you need to be thinking about the chord tones and using the scales to connect them. Otherwise it just sounds like you're washing a scale over the whole thing. True, how much you want to reflect the chords in your lines is a stylistic thing, but I think that it is such a part of the jazz language that you need a little in there.
The "play this scale over this group of chords" approach is more of a training wheels thing for beginners (IMHO.) There are people who swear up and down that this approach will (with a good ear) lead to soloing that reflects the chords, but in my experience it just doesn't work out that way - they usually just keep washing over the chords without reference to the harmony. But again, there is some rather vocal opposition to this judgment of mine.
Peace,
Kevin
-
I think that a mixture of the both will yield the best results, the more in toolkit the better (IMHO) Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar
-
From what I understand - and correct me if I'm wrong - thinking "play Dorian on the ii, Myxo on the V and Ionian on the I" when you are in a tonal harmony situation like a ii-V-I is almost like a nonsense. In this situation, the I is where everything will resolves. In modal harmony, playing Dorian - let's say D dorian - means that the point where we are going to resolve is D. So you can't have a resolution point on D, another one on G and another one on C in a ii-V-I in C when all the phrase is going to C.
(Excuse my poor english, I hope I was clear and, like I said, correct me if I'm wrong)
-
Thinking "ii" over the whole ii-V is a little more "modern" sounding to my ears than approaching the whole thing as "V." But there's exceptions. I use both ideas regularly.
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions