Fly Me To The Moon-Interactive prractical/theory group

[oilywrag]

The new poll was won by- "Fly me to the Moon"

There are two backing tracks

one here
and a pdf here www.box.net/shared/ugy0urrtsc

and a video here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhFIupVoVKc

Each backing track has a 4 bar intro

Enjoy

Tom..

[tonyknight]

Happy New Year everyone...

Thanks Tom -let's get going!
Cheers,
Tony

[markerhodes]

Great choice, fun tune.

When I tried to print the pdf, only the first page came out. I couldn't see the following pages on computer screen, either. Am I doing something wrong?

[FatJeff]

Originally Posted by markerhodes

Great choice, fun tune.

When I tried to print the pdf, only the first page came out. I couldn't see the following pages on computer screen, either. Am I doing something wrong?

Same here

[oilywrag]

Ok chaps its fixed now you can download it.
It is only 2 pages

Cheers

Tom

[fep]

Hey Tom,

Thanks, those backing tracks sound great. I'm really digging the one with the organ. Inspires me to try to play it 'bluesy' like on that Joey DeFrancesco track.

So the question I have - Do you analyze this as being all in Cmaj or do you analyze it as partially in Am and partially Cmaj?

I remember from my Classical Theory class that there often is no one right answer, different people will hear it different ways. Perhaps that's the case here.

Other forum members what do you think?

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Originally Posted by fep

So the question I have - Do you analyze this as being all in Cmaj or do you analyze it as partially in Am and partially Cmaj?

It's in C. Jazz tunes of this era are never "all in" a key.

[fep]

Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles

It's in C. Jazz tunes of this era are never "all in" a key.

Yes, and that's why most jazz tunes of this era are not analyzed as being in one key. For example go look at the analysis of our previous tunes.

So, the question stands. The question is as much an aural question as it is a theory question.

[FatJeff]

Originally Posted by fep

So the question I have - Do you analyze this as being all in Cmaj or do you analyze it as partially in Am and partially Cmaj?

I tend to think of Am and Cmaj as the same key - just relative to one another. So, pick one and go with it.

[oilywrag]

I tend to go along with Jeff on this one.

Cheers

Tom

[docbop]

C major and Ami are two different keys and notes you emphasis/avoid in your lines.

To me the progression is saying C (I don't have the chart in front of me to check the melody I just have the iReal Book changes).

If you call it Ami the first five bars would be i, ii, V III. VIma7 The sound odd to me.

If you call it C then first five bars vi, ii, V, I, IV. Pretty normal changes.

Now to what to call the Bmi7b5 | E7-9 | Ami7 A7 | now that does yell out Ami. So could be quickly going to relative minor. I don't have melody so that could help decide.

[markerhodes]

Originally Posted by fep

For discussion purposes, a Roman Numeral analysis. Note, I threw in some classical analysis where I thought it helps to explain chord function.

Thanks, fep. That helped me.

[Sailor]

Thanks guys...this is great!!

Sailor

[ksjazzguitar]

Forgive me, but that song is still under copyright, yes? It's illegal to publish it, even electronically. Putting down the the changes is one thing, but putting the entire melody is over the line. The moderators don't have a policy against this? The owner isn't afraid of liability?

Peace,
Kevin

[jayx123]

Tom and Frank, thanks!

This is how I see the tune:
I see this whole tune as having 1 key center which is C major, The minor 2 - 5 - 1s I view as extensions of the vi (A-) although on these minor progression I would play a more minor type melody.
I would also note these A7 and the C7 chords because the A7 chord is there to create a tension for the next sequence but does not hint a modulation but outlining these chords will be a good idea to follow this tension in the harmony in the improv

[tonyknight]

@Kevin - you are almost certainly right, Kevin. But as a teacher, my own understanding of copyright law is that I can use someone's lawful product as part of a learning/teaching experience. Is this your understanding too?

Cheers,
Tony

[tonyknight]

Sorry, Kevin, on the other hand to avoid any possible problems, if you are totally correct, then we might suggest that we find a way to remove the chart which Frank offered if it is possible...

[tonyknight]

@Frank... When you provide an alternative explanation for a chord, such as a V/IV for a I7, where are you coming from? Forgive my ignorance on this issue :-)

[Patriots2006]

Tonyknight,
I think I can answer that for you. The C7 is the V7 chord in the key of F going to Fmaj7. In this case the Fmaj7 happens to be the IV chord in the key of C thus the C7 chord becomes the V7 of IV within the key of C.

[docbop]

Originally Posted by tonyknight

@Kevin - you are almost certainly right, Kevin. But as a teacher, my own understanding of copyright law is that I can use someone's lawful product as part of a learning/teaching experience. Is this your understanding too?

Cheers,
Tony

Having worked in music schools the law isn't as liberal as you would think. Also this board isn't educational institution so it doesn't apply here. In practicality the copyright holder or website should be the ones to raise the issue. Most the time the being it isn't be sold and no mechanical rights involved they will see this an educational use and let it go. The website probably monitors these things and knows what parameters they need to live within. If I was concerned I would of emailed a moderator or the website admin I wouldn't post and draw attention to it.

[ksjazzguitar]

Originally Posted by tonyknight

@Kevin - you are almost certainly right, Kevin. But as a teacher, my own understanding of copyright law is that I can use someone's lawful product as part of a learning/teaching experience. Is this your understanding too?

Cheers,
Tony

I did some research about copyright for my own publishing. There is an "educational" provision in the "fair use" portion of the copyright law, but it's application here is based on two fundamental misconceptions.

One, the provisions of fair use are not free standing exemptions from copyright law - just meeting one does not exempt one from observing the copyright. They are several guidelines that a judge can consider in combination to determine if it meets the "fair use" standard.

The second problem is what is defined as "educational." While the law itself is vague, from the examples given by the government (and every copyright lawyer I could find and a few to whom I spoke) "educational" here refers to a teacher teaching a class or lesson in a structured environment. This is a teacher making a fixed number of copies for a fixed number of students as part of a structured lesson plan. The few cases on the internet have involved a site with restricted access as part of a structured educational program.

The problem is that if we interpret it the way we want to in this case, it renders copyright law meaningless. If we can simply define "educational" as "trying to communicate information," then you've just described every book and internet site in the history of mankind. Everything that is published, electronically or not, is meant to inform and therefore can be loosely defined as educational. Therefore, with this loose definition, there is nothing that could not be published on the internet (or in books) and copyright law means nothing. No judge is going to support that.

Here is the section of the law:

U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright Law: Chapter 1

Again, it is vague, but you get the idea. Notice the 4th item considered for fair use, "the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." What could be more harmful to the value of a copyright than publishing it on the internet where everyone can access it? The publishing rights are worthless once that happens.

Some further comment by Uncle Sam:

U.S. Copyright Office - Fair Use

You can find some copyright lawyers writing essays on the application of "fair use," but I have yet to find one that even comes close to defending what is going on here. They usually fail to mention this type of situation, as if it is not even a reasonable consideration. Again, they talk about copying for course material in a controlled environment, with a fixed number or at least restricted access.

And considering that we've seen music companies win settlements of hundreds of thousand of dollars against people whose sites distributing audio music, I would be worried if I owned this site. True, music publishers haven't gone on the offensive yet, but it may just be a matter of time.

If I were in charge, I would not allow any non-public domain melodies to be posted. Chord progressions are usually deemed OK - it is not explicitly stated in the law, but it is common practice to assume that chord progressions are not copyrightable and seems to have held up in a few court cases. It is also my understanding that solos are not copyrighted (unless they become compositions unto themselves) but I am less clear on that. But the law is very clear the melodies are copyrightable and publishing it on the internet where anyone can find it is clearly a violation of copyright.

And just on a philosophical note, the violation of copyright has been doing a lot of damage to the music industry in the last few decades. We should be fighting it, not supporting it.

Peace,
Kevin

[oilywrag]

You know I thought the song was first called " In other Words "
and that " fly me to the moon "was just the first line..just my £0.02p..
But then again...

Cheers Tom

[holgit]

I alway saw Bm7b5 - E7 as a II-V in A-Minor (Bar 10, 11, ...) and Em7 - A7 as a II - V in the key of D - as a turnaround to the II (Dm7) in the key of C.

[derek]

Folks, posting copyrighted tunes is against the law. Feel free to discuss tunes as much as you wish, but please refrain from posting them.

[Stackabones]

Next tune should be public domain so we can avoid gettin' sued by the MAN.

[ksjazzguitar]

Originally Posted by oilywrag

You know I thought the song was first called " In other Words "and that " fly me to the moon "was just the first line...

True, but it was eventually renamed by the publishers to avoid confusion. It was also originally a waltz if I remember correctly.

Originally Posted by Stackabones

Next tune should be public domain so we can avoid gettin' sued by the MAN.

Or just confine ourselves to writing out the chords and not the melody - it's generally agreed that that is safe.

I don't mean to be a wet blanket, but I'm just trying to look out for the forum.

Peace,
Kevin

[docbop]

Chord changes aren't copyrighted and tend to be where lead sheets/fake books differ anyway. I say post changes and let people dig up the melody on their own. Seems workable to me.

[Stackabones]

Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar

Or just confine ourselves to writing out the chords and not the melody - it's generally agreed that that is safe.

I don't mean to be a wet blanket, but I'm just trying to look out for the forum.

Peace,
Kevin

Agreed -- but let the forum operators/owners decide what's legal, not us.

For over two years & over 100 posts, the thread on the "557 Jazz Standards PDF" has been up and running without incurring the wrath of the moderators or music publishers. Perhaps the forum (and its legal team if there is one) has a different opinion about the legality of what's going on?

[Sailor]

You could also just provide a link Fortunately, (or unfortunately), every tune is already on the web.

Sailor

[fep]

Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar

Or just confine ourselves to writing out the chords and not the melody - it's generally agreed that that is safe.

I don't mean to be a wet blanket, but I'm just trying to look out for the forum.

Peace,
Kevin

Sorry to create the controversy... I see my post magically disappeared (without me receiving any notification, I thought I might have contributed enough to this site over the years to at least get the courtesy of a notification.)

I was out of town and just got back home. I'll repost with the chords only. I'll get to it tomorrow.