Chord Scale Approach

[Reg]

Hi Reg ... I'm getting a lot of ideas from your posts. I appreciate the way you treat jazz directly, on it's own merits. It has really made me re-think and simplify my impov.

I am interested in your concept of vertical and horizontal thinking. I have studied Joe Pass quite a bit and I know that he thought in a similar way. He used specific chord names to identify scales he would draw upon for creating lines. There was not a lot of ambiguity. For example,, G7 was mixo only, G7+ was whole tone, G7b9 implied Cmi, G7#5b9 identified G alt etc. This way, the vertical thinking could guide the linear playing and facilitate a reasonably unambiguous means of writing chord charts for solo guitar.

My question to you is ... Do you use specific or unique chord names or symbols when you use your modal interchange thinking?

Hope this makes sense to you.

Cheers

Hey Jazzaluk... Modal Interchange is a method or source for new Harmonic structures to replace existing ones. And I can't take credit for term or concept, early 1900's in traditional theory, 60's in jazz theory. But yes... modal interchange along with re-harmonization , standard jazz chord sequences, approach, passing and auxiliary chords. I also use the process of using Blue notes to influence the harmonic progressions I hear/play. The notation is similar to " Standard Chord Symbol Notation" by Carl Brandt and Clinton Roemer. I have old copy from mid 70's, it has a few problems with spellings, mainly with Dom. 5th. but is the standard source most composers use. If you give me examples of progressions or tunes, it might be easier to show examples rather than verbal explain. Would be much faster... Best Reg

[Aristotle]

I agree with Jonny and Reg... Learn it well, "forget it", and play what you hear!

Just to be clear, I don't think "foget" is really what happens. It becomes ingrained, instinctive, or done subconciously. You want the concious part of your mind to anticipate and hear, and the translation of that into technical execution to occur with as little drain on the consious thought process as possible.

Of course, that leave open the question of whether chord-scale theory is the better vehicle. I can play altered-note melodies on a dom-seventh, but if I have to think "melodic minor a half-step above the root" or 'melodic minor on the seventh degree of the Mixolydian mode' at least two beats will go by in the interim.

It seems to me the process of constantly imposing a chord scale on yourself pretty much forecloses the possibility of "forgetting" some of which you want to forget.

BTW, does anyone call you Doctor Boob?

[Aristotle]

Do you use specific or unique chord names or symbols when you use your modal interchange thinking?

Kind of a different topic than CST?

As far as M.I., to me, confusing name for some simple ideas. Instead of playing "Rhythm" as Bb-Gm7, you play Bb-G7. Voila! Has more bite that way.

Embelling chords inculdes things like adding notes that are note in the origical key or changing notes in a chord to ones that are not in the original key. Major for Minor, or add b9 for example, or both Bb to G7b9. Easier on the head to add and changes notes than to futz around with a mouthful like "Modal Interchange."

And then there's the related "borrowed" chords idea. I am not borrowing them, because I have intention of giving them back. Non diatonic chords sound good too.

[Jazzaluk]

Hey Jazzaluk... Modal Interchange is a method or source for new Harmonic structures to replace existing ones. And I can't take credit for term or concept, early 1900's in traditional theory, 60's in jazz theory. But yes... modal interchange along with re-harmonization , standard jazz chord sequences, approach, passing and auxiliary chords. I also use the process of using Blue notes to influence the harmonic progressions I hear/play. The notation is similar to " Standard Chord Symbol Notation" by Carl Brandt and Clinton Roemer. I have old copy from mid 70's, it has a few problems with spellings, mainly with Dom. 5th. but is the standard source most composers use. If you give me examples of progressions or tunes, it might be easier to show examples rather than verbal explain. Would be much faster... Best Reg

OK thanks ... I will see if I can work up an example to ask the question.

[Jazzaluk]

Kind of a different topic than CST?

As far as M.I., to me, confusing name for some simple ideas. Instead of playing "Rhythm" as Bb-Gm7, you play Bb-G7. Voila! Has more bite that way.

Embelling chords inculdes things like adding notes that are note in the origical key or changing notes in a chord to ones that are not in the original key. Major for Minor, or add b9 for example, or both Bb to G7b9. Easier on the head to add and changes notes than to futz around with a mouthful like "Modal Interchange."

And then there's the related "borrowed" chords idea. I am not borrowing them, because I have intention of giving them back. Non diatonic chords sound good too.

It was probably a misplaced question, maybe not even a good question.

I have been using a chord naming convention to write charts for my own solo playing. I tend to think vertically and horizontally a the same time and was looking for a way to refine my methods using some of Reg's experience.

I have been using unique chord names to identify both linear and chord substitution options as a framework for mapping out improvisation options and creating variations from chorus to chorus. I can extract three, sometimes four, chord options from each unique chord name which gives alot of options and freedom when playing chord melodies and lines.

I derived the approach from three sources (Barry Harris, Joe Pass and Bucky Pizzarelli) and it is just my personal way ... It is theory based but also recognizes the geometry of the fretboard, its limits and advantages. Probably would not be well received on this forum, so I won't go into it.

(and no ... I'm not writing a book , I'm just a guy that has enjoyed playing jazz guitar for a three or four decades)

[Aristotle]

It was probably a misplaced question, maybe not even a good question.

Maybe not a good answer. Just trying to plow through the jargon.

I tend to think vertically and horizontally a the same time and was looking for a way to refine my methods using some of Reg's experience.

I probably have no good answer here. But this sounds like one of the few things I understood from old George Russell (along with the #11 is a natural extension than the P11).

Horizontal - the scale (its tonic and tonality) of the improviser are imposed on the chord changes.
(Overly) Simple examples: using the one basic blue scale over all three chords; or Hendrix on Hey Joe, blues scale on all five chords.

Vertical - the chords control the tonality the improviser uses
Simple example: CST itself. Playing blues C7 = C Mix, F7 = F Mix

Some people link this to "tonal gravity" - where does it want to resolve (controlled by the chord); or where is it made to resolve (by the players imposed scale).

If that's not it, in a nutshell, I am not sure I want the rest of the nut.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

I probably have no good answer here. But this sounds like one of the few things I understood from old George Russell (along with the #11 is a natural extension than the P11).

Not to hijack this thread for long, but according to George Russell, what's the next note after the #11 in the stacking fifths series that gets used to justify the #11:

root .. perfect 5th ... major ninth ... major 13th ... major 3rd ... major seventh ... #11th ... ?

[Aristotle]

Augmented 15

[max_power]

Not to hijack this thread for long, but according to George Russell, what's the next note after the #11 in the stacking fifths series that gets used to justify the #11:

root .. perfect 5th ... major ninth ... major 13th ... major 3rd ... major seventh ... #11th ... ?

Then you move the key up a half step. Duh.

[Aristotle]

You guys have to be kidding!

I go out on a limb, answer questions about terms and ideas I don't use or think about, and never tried to explain before (modal interchange, horizontal and vertical playing) - and no one can find any place where I missed anything?

[paynow]

Not to hijack this thread for long, but according to George Russell, what's the next note after the #11 in the stacking fifths series that gets used to justify the #11:

root .. perfect 5th ... major ninth ... major 13th ... major 3rd ... major seventh ... #11th ... ?

...sharp 5th, flat 3rd, flat 7th, perfect 4th, minor 2nd

Directly from page 14 of the LCCOTO.

[Aristotle]

...sharp 5th, flat 3rd, flat 7th, perfect 4th, minor 2nd

Directly from page 14 of the LCCOTO.

Really? It says min 2, and not Aug 15? Or wait, that's more like the Aug 33.

Seriously, does he have the fifth of F# as Db, and not C#?

[JonnyPac]

ZZZzzz

[Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D]

Wake up, Mr. Pac!!! The LCCOTO is knocking!!! Just kidding.

[sc06yl]

The Chord Scale approach is a good way to suck less. That is the way I have been taught it. I am surprised more people don't see it this way. It is a good thing to have in your pocket, but it shouldn't be treated as the end all and be all of your playing. After about a year and half of music school I have realized my best improvisations haven't change that significantly, apart from getting better at lifting cool licks and throwing them in solos, and a better understanding and feeling of time. The trick is when I am having a bad day, they tend to suck way less. Mostly thanks to the tools the chord/scale approach. But being taught to play in positions has probably helped this as well. Without a serious mathematical inquiry it is hard to say which has helped more. It is very useful to be able to approach a chart, say like infant eyes, or something, with weirder changes, and at least not suck at blowing over them.

I say the more ways you can put together a solo, the better. Like they say, there is more than one way to extricate the epidermis from a feline quadruped.

[Aristotle]

The Chord Scale approach is a good way to suck less. That is the way I have been taught it. I am surprised more people don't see it this way.

I would think that's how pretty much everyone sees it. That said, there is a question you might ask yourself. Suck less than what? Is there another approach that would make you suck more in the same time and with the same effort?

[FatJeff]

The Chord Scale approach is a good way to suck less. That is the way I have been taught it. I am surprised more people don't see it this way. It is a good thing to have in your pocket, but it shouldn't be treated as the end all and be all of your playing. After about a year and half of music school I have realized my best improvisations haven't change that significantly, apart from getting better at lifting cool licks and throwing them in solos, and a better understanding and feeling of time. The trick is when I am having a bad day, they tend to suck way less. Mostly thanks to the tools the chord/scale approach. But being taught to play in positions has probably helped this as well. Without a serious mathematical inquiry it is hard to say which has helped more. It is very useful to be able to approach a chart, say like infant eyes, or something, with weirder changes, and at least not suck at blowing over them.

I say the more ways you can put together a solo, the better. Like they say, there is more than one way to extricate the epidermis from a feline quadruped.

This is funny, because I'm in music school too, and I was taught to not use the chord-scale method, at least not yet. But it's something that I am looking forward to getting better at. Most of my improv now centers on knowing changes really, really well and then going at it strictly by ear. Fine and dandy for most "standards" changes, but for Coltrane tunes like 26-2 or Moment's Notice, it doesn't really do me a lot of favors. I'd say it's on tunes like these that CS works well.

It's also funny how you're being taught to play in position, and I'm being told to break that habit of mine (which I picked up with my years playing classical guitar). Different interpretations to be sure!

[Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D]

It is very useful to be able to approach a chart, say like infant eyes, or something, with weirder changes, and at least not suck at blowing over them.

Nice post. Serious. Wayne Shorter or other composers like him are nearly impossible to blow over without some CST. This is my favorite jazz! The trad jazz changes can be played by ear and chord-tone linear easy enough. There is merit in handling them well, but it does little for oddball changes... Interesting changes... Jazz at it's harmonic peak, IMO.

[sc06yl]

Perhaps suck-less isn't the right way to put it. I think a better phrase would be "become more consistent in your improvisations". Who doesn't like consistency.

For sure, as far as position playing goes, I use to think up/down the neck, and playing in position has giving me a little more continuity, surprisingly (because it was contrary to what I thought would happen) helped me think in larger intervals (when I am playing in 5th position I have three octaves of A's right on the tips of my fingers) helped me learn and think in terms of modes better, and also forced me to become more focused on my left hand technique.

Like I said, there is more than one way to skin a cat. You ask ten teachers, they are likely to give you different opinions. I have given some of their thoughts serious work, like position playing, which I never did before, having no formal training on the guitar, and less to ideas, like ones involving the bebop scales. The CS wasn't the first thing I was taught either, first it was 3rds and 7ths, then neighbour tones, and then, and then...ect. I have a feeling every teacher teaches what they are good at, or what helped them. It would only make sense then that there are, a million ways to approach improvisation.

[Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D]

I'm now really curious what these anti-CST players think of and use. I can't imagine playing without knowing the parent scale...

I think like this... big to small...

Key
Scale/Mode
Basic CS tones
Extended CS tones
Chromatic connections

The middle three categories are the main CST focuses. The key and chromatic embellishments are the extreme ends. Keys provide a general overview, and chromaticism without a context is nondescript at best.

None of these views are dispensable, IMHO. I am still surprised at the resistance to CST there is here among guitarists. It seems like they are cutting themselves short of a good harmonic overview.

[FatJeff]

I think a lot of the resistance comes from the fact that playing using CST is difficult. It takes a lot of brainpower. Let's take the first 3 chords of Someday My Prince Will Come, for instance: Fmaj7 - A7#5 - Bb7#11. When making the transition from one chord to the next, if I'm using CST, I have to think "F Ionian, let's see, that's one flat (Bb), and here comes A7#5, so I'll play A mixolydian and sharp the 5th, so that's 3 sharps for the key of A (F#, C#, G#) minus one for the b7th (F#, C# now), plus one for the 5th which makes 3 sharps again (F#, C#, E#), and uh oh, here comes Bb7#11, so that's gonna be - uh, what is it? - let's use a Lydian dominant on Bb, so that's going to be 2 flats for the key of Bb (Bb, Eb) plus another one to make it dominant (Ab), then add in a sharp on the 11th, which makes the Eb an E natural..." This is the kind of thinking that can drive a man nuts when he's trying to improvise.

OR...I can just think overall keys, on the order of several measures, and play more or less diatonically in the key of F, just using my ear to make adjustments for the alterations. Guess which one is easier, at least for the novice?

Don't get me wrong, I am intensely interested in application of CST, it's just that I fail to see how to actually do it in realtime without putting in enormous shedding effort. As someone else mentioned before, CST really shines in non-diatonic tunes like Coltrane, Shorter, Golson, etc. I would like to get there someday, but to date I've not really found a simple method for doing so.

[Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D]

SDMPWC changes are F Major, A7b13 Phrygian Dom. (D HM), and Bbmaj7+11 (Lydian)... All that goes in is a C# over the A7 thinking "key", but thinking scale/mode makes you avoid the p4 Bb of F, and the P4 D of A7(alt is an alt, no pun intended), the IV chord Bb is open turf. The next level in is the linear path that connects them logically, and that includes chromatic runs, etc. Not too bad?

[Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D]

I play it in Bb actually.

I play Bb Ionain | D P.Dom | Eb Lydian | G P.Dom | C Dorian | G P. Dom. | C Dorian | F Mixo. | and so on.

[Aristotle]

I'm now really curious what these anti-CST players think of and use. I can't imagine playing without knowing the parent scale...

Anti-CST players? Maybe one of these days you will find one to ask. Then the next time you say CST is more economical, you'll know the answer to - more economical than what?

As to the parent scale? That's easy. One this side of quarter-tones, the chromatic scale is the parent scale.

[Aristotle]

Like I said, there is more than one way to skin a cat. You ask ten teachers, they are likely to give you different opinions.

Really? I think 8 or 9 of them will give the same opinion. In fact, if it's on this forum, the opinion likely be to use the melodic minor.