The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 67
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    Our standard for April 2017 will be Ann Ronnel's Willow Weep for Me (1932).

    Background:
    Jazz Standards Songs and Instrumentals (Willow Weep for Me)

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Another great choice. I'll be in soon, I love this tune.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Another good old standard! good job M-Ster!

    wiz (Howie)

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Ragman-- "jaunty." I enjoyed it.

    Hadda grab the Kingpin and throw in a first take too...trying it in F, like Cannonball.



    I've been doing some Spotify listening on this track...man. for such a cool song there sure are a lot of LAME versions.

    Now there's one more
    Last edited by mr. beaumont; 04-01-2017 at 04:12 PM.

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Great choice ! One of the great chord/melody exponents, Ron Eschete , has his take on the tune. The bluesy treatment suits the chord structure.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    Ragman-- "jaunty." I enjoyed it.

    Hadda grab the Kingpin and throw in a first take too...trying it in F, like Cannonball.



    I've been doing some Spotify listening on this track...man. for such a cool song there sure are a lot of LAME versions.

    Now there's one more
    Dang, that's a quick chord solo version. Is that just ear? I could probably do it with a chart a lookout quicker than without, but I'm guessing you don't?
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 04-01-2017 at 05:40 PM.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    trying it in F
    I'll have to do a cooler, more jazzy version at some point and it probably won't be in G (Wes and Wynton Kelly did it in C, I think, but that could turn out lame too).

    To be honest, I didn't want to get bogged down in the slow blues scale again, gets samey. It was more fun banging out something with a bit of lift.

    I wasn't just returning like for like, btw, I really do like those neat sounds you make. I'll master it all one day... maybe :-)

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    Dang, that's a quick chord solo version. Is that just ear? I could probably do it with a chart a lookout quicker than without, but I'm guessing you don't?
    Yeah, I just eared it. I was pretty familiar with this one though, just in G. So this was just 2 frets down

    Funny, for a tune so bluesy, there's only so many places for the blues scale. It's pretty hip.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

    Funny, for a tune so bluesy, there's only so many places for the blues scale. It's pretty hip.
    Actually I thought that was partly the problem. It can end up not sounding like it should at all. The Cm bit is okay, apart from that it's mostly dominants and mixo/subs. But I'm not complaining, it can be done - and will be :-)

  11. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    Yeah, I just eared it. I was pretty familiar with this one though, just in G. So this was just 2 frets down

    Funny, for a tune so bluesy, there's only so many places for the blues scale. It's pretty hip.
    Well, good ear, Jeff.
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 04-02-2017 at 07:18 AM.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Hey, matt, you've taken it off! NO-O-O, it was fine! Honest... put it back, it was perfectly good. It's the angst striking.

    I'd just written you a long post. I think I'm going to post it too. This is a bit naughty because you have the perfect right to delete and NOT have it resurrected. But on this occasion... there was nothing wrong with your playing or your thoughts.

    (If you really, really object, I'll delete too, doesn't matter)


    I'd be interested in other's take on this recording
    It's fine, actually quite good. We probably all suffer from red light panic! If you really want a comment then the rhythm could be broken up with the odd single-note spurt between the chords; breaks it up.

    There are other Wes takes, not just the Half-Note one. One's bouncy, like I did it - although that was my idea, I hadn't heard that version then.

    Also, of course, there are all the other players too, Pass, Benson, Kessell, Martino - they've all done it! And they're all pretty samey too. The Benson version goes a little crazy and even Martino gets stuck between endless blue scale and rapid mixo/arpeggios.

    One really perplexing thing about recording myself is the difference in perception between my "playing self" and my "listening-back self". My playing self seems kind of fixated on note choice, while my listening-back self is more interested in phrasing and not breaking time. Basically, I guess I need to just record more. Need a simpler set,up to start.
    Absolutely. Simple to start with, then build up. I'm sure a lot of people start with too complex stuff and then give up.

    Personally, I tend to just do it and then leave it quite a long while to clear the brain (like the next day) and then listen to it as some other detached listener would. And if it passes the test then good. Otherwise it's dumped.

    Certainly recording a lot helps, you do get used to being in that mode. But you're right about the angst bit - what you think sounds wonderful at the time can sound pedestrian later. And what you have a sinking feeling about can sound great later... it's a minefield.

    So I tend to make multiple takes, go and do something totally different, and then review them. I don't think the casual listener realises the sheer volume of work that goes into this stuff. And the suffering!

    Anyway, the bit at the very end, on the repeat of the A section made me decide to just scrap the whole thing, just chuck it. I stopped playing at that point, because I thought it sounded so bad. Then, when I listened back, that was probably one of my favorite parts. Found myself thinking "It was just getting interesting. You weren't thinking so much".
    That's just it, thinking - or worrying, more like! Trouble is we can't produce those moments when it 'just happens', it's pot luck. Actually I find the more I know and internalise the tune the simpler it tends to get played because the brain's sorted it out deep down.

    I often wonder about pro players (not just guitarists). They know so many tunes, maybe hundreds, and each one is obviously completely familiar. But the occasional story does emerge about hours spent in the studio trying to get it right.

    Sorry this is so long, I don't usually bang on so much about the behind-the-scenes tribulations of recording.
    I suspect the truth is there's only so much one can do with a blues song and making it sound attractive and somewhat original is hard.
    Last edited by ragman1; 04-02-2017 at 08:47 AM.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Matt, please put that vid back, it was fine. Have a little faith, baby!

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Btw, this is the bouncy Wes take.


  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Hello All,


    I am planning on starting up a Study Group in May 2017 based on Randy Vincent’s book “The Cellular Approach”. I figured that we could give everybody a month to check out the book and decide whether or not they would like to commit to the group. The book explores cellular improvisation. A cell is a four note group with at least 3 chord tones. It is meant to lead to building improvisations that are melodic and follow the chord changes logically.


    The Introduction reads: “This book is a collection of things to practice on the guitar that will help to develop the vocabulary of jazz improvisation while simultaneously developing and maintaining single-note technique. . . . the focus will mainly be on “cellular” improvisation, which is using very short melodic cells strung together into longer lines. Once we get to the place where we are using strings of cells for “outside” and “free” playing we will move beyond the cellular concept and into some other approaches. I have included many lines and phrases transcribed from the recordings of several master guitarists to demonstrate the validity of the concepts behind the exercises given.”


    There are 5 chapters in this book: Chapter 1 - Cycles and II-V Sequences (247 examples). Chapter 2 - Turnarounds (163 examples). Chapter 3 - Longer Progressions (192 examples). Chapter 4 Outside and Free Playing (113 examples). Chapter 5 - More Outside Lines - All Purpose Licks including Chromatic Intervals, Serial Tone Rows, and 23rd Chords (99 examples)


    I have had this book on my shelf for the past 2 years but I have only played the first 5 pages. Maybe a group will help motivate me and others to incorporate this concept into my own playing.


    The book does not come with a CD (at least my book didn’t). I use iRealPro for backing tracks.



    1. My plan right now is to learn 10 examples a month. Each example is only 2 to four bars long. I have completed the first 12 with minimal effort. I would estimate that this is a 1 to 2 hour commitment per month. We may want to change this depending on the pace maintained by the group once it gets going, plus at that rate it would take us 6 years and 9 months to complete the book.
    2. Discuss or post your performing of the examples.
    3. Discuss or post where to play the “Cells” on the neck of the guitar. Even though Randy does give some indication where he would like the cells to be played, as we know they are always alternative fingerings.
    4. Discuss or post the application of these “cells” into Jazz Standards. I think that this is the most vital part of the exercise. A concept is only a concept until it is made a reality (I just made that up. It is not a famous quote)
    5. At some point, (maybe at the conclusion) I would combine this with Randy’s other famous book “Line Games” and see how it relates to the playing of great guitarists like Wes Montgomery, Jimmy Raney, Tal Farlow, Pat Martino and Joe Pass



    I will be posting this on several threads so I apologize if you seeing this more than once.


    Let me know what you think.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Listen to 6:27 on the Wes version posted by ragman1 - refreshing to hear that even Wes can totally screw something up!

    I think he was kind of annoyed because he deliberately then played a kind of 'look at me goofing up' silly run at that point. I think this is the only time I've ever heard Wes make such a stumble!

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Oh, we probably don't know the half of it.

    I was reading about movies. Some directors make them do scenes again and again, occasionally running into the hundreds - seriously, just to get a look right or some such thing.

    It's hard in the arts :-)

  18. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Hey, matt, you've taken it off! NO-O-O, it was fine! Honest... put it back, it was perfectly good. It's the angst striking.

    I'd just written you a long post. I think I'm going to post it too. This is a bit naughty because you have the perfect right to delete and NOT have it resurrected. But on this occasion... there was nothing wrong with your playing or your thoughts.

    (If you really, really object, I'll delete too, doesn't matter)




    It's fine, actually quite good. We probably all suffer from red light panic! If you really want a comment then the rhythm could be broken up with the odd single-note spurt between the chords; breaks it up.

    There are other Wes takes, not just the Half-Note one. One's bouncy, like I did it - although that was my idea, I hadn't heard that version then.

    Also, of course, there are all the other players too, Pass, Benson, Kessell, Martino - they've all done it! And they're all pretty samey too. The Benson version goes a little crazy and even Martino gets stuck between endless blue scale and rapid mixo/arpeggios.



    Absolutely. Simple to start with, then build up. I'm sure a lot of people start with too complex stuff and then give up.

    Personally, I tend to just do it and then leave it quite a long while to clear the brain (like the next day) and then listen to it as some other detached listener would. And if it passes the test then good. Otherwise it's dumped.

    Certainly recording a lot helps, you do get used to being in that mode. But you're right about the angst bit - what you think sounds wonderful at the time can sound pedestrian later. And what you have a sinking feeling about can sound great later... it's a minefield.

    So I tend to make multiple takes, go and do something totally different, and then review them. I don't think the casual listener realises the sheer volume of work that goes into this stuff. And the suffering!



    That's just it, thinking - or worrying, more like! Trouble is we can't produce those moments when it 'just happens', it's pot luck. Actually I find the more I know and internalise the tune the simpler it tends to get played because the brain's sorted it out deep down.

    I often wonder about pro players (not just guitarists). They know so many tunes, maybe hundreds, and each one is obviously completely familiar. But the occasional story does emerge about hours spent in the studio trying to get it right.

    Sorry this is so long, I don't usually bang on so much about the behind-the-scenes tribulations of recording.
    I suspect the truth is there's only so much one can do with a blues song and making it sound attractive and somewhat original is hard.
    It was early enough I thought I might get away with it. :-) Oh well.... Noodlin'

  19. #18
    Jkniff26 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    Ragman-- "jaunty." I enjoyed it.

    Hadda grab the Kingpin and throw in a first take too...trying it in F, like Cannonball.



    I've been doing some Spotify listening on this track...man. for such a cool song there sure are a lot of LAME versions.

    Now there's one more
    No that sounds great . Nice that you sound inspired and spontaneous. Some real cool voice leading bits on the chords. Nice feel and sound.........So how does this work? One standard a month and everyone posts versions I assume . Ok duh probably answered my own question


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    you guys are quick!


    a quick pass at it



  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    I'm a bit embarrassed to ask this, but what is a good G9/6 fingering? Something like this?
    5
    3
    2
    2
    x
    3
    It doesn't sound bad to me. Do I need a 3rd? Or anything else?

    or

    5
    5
    4
    2
    x
    3
    This one has a 3rd but it doesn't sound as good to me.

    I could be way off on these.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Too big of chords.

    Try x x 5 4 5 5

  23. #22
    Jkniff26 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    So...um...we'll be hearing from you then? Goody
    Yes it's about time I dove in an posted something and this looks like the place to do it. Let me pull my man cave together and hook up a camera.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Definitely, this the place low pressure...post one, comment on a few, gather some ideas, post again. My favorite thing abit this place.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    Definitely, this the place low pressure...post one, comment on a few, gather some ideas, post again. My favorite thing abit this place.
    Absolutely

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Seems like this tune needs to be funkified. Maybe I'll try that. April 2017 - Willow Weep for MeApril 2017 - Willow Weep for Me
    I found a nice latin version (Poncho Sanchez).
    Last edited by KirkP; 04-02-2017 at 08:26 PM.