Jimmy Raney On Scales and Chords

[paynow]

YouTube Video

The master.

[ksjazzguitar]

Yes, good evidence of what I've been trying to say for years - that the whole chord/scale thing was a teaching tool that was invented later on. The early jazz cats didn't think that way.

I still think that it can be a good teaching tool for beginners. The problem is that sooooo many players never really get beyond it. They seem to think they can just run their scales and their ears will train themselves. But I've ranted enough about that before so I'll end there.

Nice clip.

Peace,
Kevin

[wizard3739]

IMHO, listening to, studying and transcribing Jimmy Raneys' music is a great way to learn jazz guitar. He never seemed to run out of melodic musical ideas and concepts. During his later years he admitted to having become primarily an "ear" player. During his earlier years he transcribed many of Charlie Parkers' solos as well as some other jazz greats. IMHO, an aspiring jazz guitarist coundn't find a better musician to to listen to and study.

wiz

[mr. beaumont]

It's good to hear this stuff from a real master.

I do plenty of analyzing too, but it's becoming clearer and clearer to me that analyzing is more effective "after the fact."

So in otherwards, "I heard this, I played it, and then I went back and figured out how it could work again somewhere else" is more constructive than "Okay, got that melodic minor memorized...now...where can I play this?"

[markerhodes]

Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar

Yes, good evidence of what I've been trying to say for years - that the whole chord/scale thing was a teaching tool that was invented later on. The early jazz cats didn't think that way.

I agree. Part of the reason is that they didn't *have* to. Musicians thought of tunes as, well, tunes, rather than as chord progressions with heads. Players learned to solo by playing off the melody, not the changes. And classic solos---Lester Young's solo on "Lady Be Good" is perhaps the best-known example--were learned by generations of players, who thereby picked up articulation, rhythm, anticipation, swing, accent, and so on.

I'm working to make my playing 'sing' more, and swing more too.

[mr. beaumont]

Originally Posted by markerhodes

I agree. Part of the reason is that they didn't *have* to. Musicians thought of tunes as, well, tunes, rather than as chord progressions with heads. Players learned to solo by playing off the melody, not the changes.

Well, Jimmy's playing is a lot more Hawk than Pres, to my ears-- but you can still be melodic and play the changes--and I don't think Raney's suggesting otherwise.

He could play almost entirely by ear near the end of his life because he had spent so much time "hearing" those changes. I think Raney's point is more along the lines of using what the song gives you as harmonic backdrop and "jumping off points" and not obsessing over chord/scale relationships--the chord often contains all the harmonic info you need.

[ksjazzguitar]

Yeah, you can still be playing the changes and not playing around the melody. And playing the chord changes is very different (but can overlap) with playing the chord/scale. Raney is making it clear that he is playing the chord changes and is not thinking about chord/scale theory.

It's funny because I often get told, "I like what you're doing it's nice to hear someone playing around the melody." But I don't play around the melody, I just play the chord changes. But so many people play the scale changes now that people have forgotten that there is a difference.

Peace,
Kevin

[markerhodes]

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

Well, Jimmy's playing is a lot more Hawk than Pres, to my ears-- but you can still be melodic and play the changes--and I don't think Raney's suggesting otherwise.

Oh, sure, I agree. I was thinking about how players *developed* in Jimmy's day. It wasn't through chord / scale theory but from learning tunes and solos.