Mark Levine

[Sailor]

Besides all the other means of self education...this forum, youtube, an occasional teacher...I am plowing through The Jazz Theory book, (which I like, but don't love)

A quote from the book regarding the first three bars of Stella..."Em7b5, the first chord in bar 1 of Stella, is from the sixth mode of G Melodic Minor. The chord in bar 2, A7alt, is the seventh mode of the Bb Melodic Minor scale. The chord in the third bar, Cm7, is the second, or Dorian mode of Bb major."

Is this how you guys look at and think of a progression?? Any other ways to look at it? I though the first two chords were just unresolved II-V in D minor??

Tx, Sailor

[randalljazz]

[Helgo]

Hi Sailor.

I know the book but I don´t own it. Could you please say something about the context in which this quote is to be found?

I could imagine that the quoted analysis could be in respect to melodic minor and it´s modes.

Apart from that I would analyse this as "unresolved II-V in D minor", too.

Cheers,
H.

[gersdal]

Originally Posted by Sailor

"Em7b5, the first chord in bar 1 of Stella, is from the sixth mode of G Melodic Minor. The chord in bar 2, A7alt, is the seventh mode of the Bb Melodic Minor scale. The chord in the third bar, Cm7, is the second, or Dorian mode of Bb major."

This would just give me a headache, and would be of no help on the bandstand.

Originally Posted by Sailor

I though the first two chords were just unresolved II-V in D minor??

This is how I would think also.

[JonR]

Originally Posted by Sailor

Besides all the other means of self education...this forum, youtube, an occasional teacher...I am plowing through The Jazz Theory book, (which I like, but don't love)

A quote from the book regarding the first three bars of Stella..."Em7b5, the first chord in bar 1 of Stella, is from the sixth mode of G Melodic Minor. The chord in bar 2, A7alt, is the seventh mode of the Bb Melodic Minor scale. The chord in the third bar, Cm7, is the second, or Dorian mode of Bb major."

Is this how you guys look at and think of a progression??

No. That's a good book in many ways, but is highly misleading when it comes to functional (pre-modal) jazz harmony.
What he's doing is taking modal chord-scale concepts, and applying them to pre-modal jazz. That's OK (we can do anything we like with old music, that's what "jazz" is about ), but he doesn't make the underlying principles clear.
It's most certainly NOT the way any jazz musician before 1960 would have thought about it.
Not only that: as gersdal says, it's a headache to think that way. (Unless you are fully versed in chord-scale theory, totally on top of all your scales, and enthusiastic to explore every single chord to the utmost... and then you'll still probably leave your audience behind anyway.)
It's not seeing the wood for the trees.

Originally Posted by Sailor

Any other ways to look at it? I though the first two chords were just unresolved II-V in D minor??

Precisely. You can't go wrong if you think that way. And then work from melody and chord tones.
When a chord lasts for more than a bar (as it does with some chords in this tune), then chord-scale theory (a la Levine) can play a part, if that's the direction you want to go in.

But Stella is a functional harmony tune. It has a chord progression; it's not a series of isolated modal chords. The voice-leading is fundamental; the way chord tones connect across the sequence.
When it comes to passing notes (anything between chord tones), it might be worth considering chord-scales, but diatonic theory will still serve you well. Ie just pick notes from the current key as passing notes. If you're not sure what the current key is (Stella is a typical example of confusion in this area), pick notes from chord before or after (after is often best). If that doesn't work, or is difficult, just add notes a half-step below each chord tone! (Chromatics like that are a good part of all jazz improv anyway.) And connect phrases across the chords.

If you want a refreshing antidote to chord-scale theory orthodoxy, try the first 30 seconds of this:
Hal Galper's Master Class - Technique, Part 2 - YouTube
- now your palate is refreshed, you may begin again...
Don't reject CST altogether, but take it with a pinch of salt. It's not how jazz musicians before 1960 thought or played, and not how many since then play. So it's controversial, but is still one valid kind of approach. It depends on whether you want to play older jazz tunes in an appropriate vintage style (eg bebop), or whether you want to open them up and dismantle the functionality of the chords.
And it also depends, of course, on how much you value melody .

(In some of the rest of that video he mixes concepts from different periods, slightly confusingly, but there's lots of nuggets there, and in his other videos. Worth being aware that he's teaching technically skilled students with little jazz experience how to look at improvisation from a historical perspective; understanding how the old guys thought, not just delivering predigested academic theory.)

[bako]

The one aspect of historical jazz methodology that I am certain of is it's strong aural tradition.
My feeling, it is best to learn sounds first and find or study ways to describe them later.
From that vantage point we are able to make better decisions about what concepts we find useful.

[JakeAcci]

Great video JonR, thanks.

As for the original question, I definitely agree with Bako and JonR.

Stella has very clear key centers and temporary modulations through out. It is a very functional tune that is mostly ii Vs often without resolving to a i or I, the easiest way to think of the ii Vs is to orient oneself towards their hypothetical destination.

Mark Levin has some great and helpful insight, but the CST is a little confusing in some respects. (Randall, would you like a soda?) To be maybe a little simplistic, my perspective/philosophy is that to improvise over functional tunes it's best to learn actual language from recordings, try to make sense of that language only in terms of ways to play and resolve to chord tones as that really is the jazz improvisers first priority (well, and doing so melodically).

After there's a firm grasp on that...which could take one month or thirty years...I think exploring chord scale possibilities is helpful for the "other three notes." Meaning...the chord gives you four notes, chord scales have seven notes. The way I look it, it's just like saying "oh, by the way, these other three notes may also sound good over that chord." But to take this approach the improviser has to learn to hear all seven of those notes!

For example, I've played Stella for years, and for a while I just had to grapple with clearly articulating the minor ii V that didn't resolve. Once I felt comfortable with that concept I became more comfortable adding more color to the m7b5 chords by incorporating the natural 9th in my lines...same idea with natural 13 over 7b9. These come from chord scales (locrain natural 2 for the m7b5 with 9, dominant H/W scale, among others for 13b9) but my view is (echoing Bako) to hear the individual tones and have that as a focus; what color I want in my line.

[Sailor]

Thanks for the great answers guys...I find Levines book overly-confusing.

"I know the book but I don´t own it. Could you please say something about the context in which this quote is to be found?" To answer this he is talking about connecting scales, and using Stella as an example.

I guess I prefer to think along the lines of chords being tonic, Dominant 7, etc...and playing lines that sound good. The theory is very interesting though, and helps when you are teaching.

Tx, Sailor