-
))) My comment was ironical...
Originally Posted by Robertkoa
quite on the contrary... I never cared if jazz player can or cannot read music... yes in today's world professional is expected to be good sight-reader..
But speaking about musicianship in jazz reading notes is not that important. There are enough good sight-reading machines in orchestras who often cannot play anything by ear...
But it's only to a degree when one feels quite confident about what he is doing...
as you seem to be interested in theoretic approaches you have to learn to read (maybe not fluently but still)...
-
12-06-2017 05:57 AM
-
Christian,
What is a "CST style" scale?
From what I gathered, CST basically refers to finding all the possible scales that contain the notes of a given chord. CST also includes information about how to determine which one fits best in a given situation.
I didn't see anything in Nettles and Graf, for example, which suggested that certain scales aren't CST. How does that work?
Another thing I didn't see in the material I read was much about how to find and use scales that don't include the cord tones. To my ear, a lot of modern sounding players avoid chord tones for extended sections of solos. When something catches my ear and makes me want to start transcribing, invariably it's a clever use of tones that are not obviously related to the COM, bearing in mind, of course, that theorists can find a connection between any interval and a type of soup.
-
For me in my playing - Using a scale harmonically (particularly intervallically, perhaps using US triads, perhaps non-tertially) as opposed to running a stepwise scale through changes. *Particularly* to extend the sound of a non-resolving static chord sound such as maj/min, sus etc. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
I don't bother using CST to understand stuff I already see through the prism of trad functional harmony or Barry Harris. I use CST for a CST sound you can't get the other way.From what I gathered, CST basically refers to finding all the possible scales that contain the notes of a given chord. CST also includes information about how to determine which one fits best in a given situation.
I didn't see anything in Nettles and Graf, for example, which suggested that certain scales aren't CST. How does that work?
See above. I learn by transcribing Kurt, Allan, Adam Rogers etc. There's plenty of books out there, Juris modern chords, etc.Another thing I didn't see in the material I read was much about how to find and use scales that don't include the cord tones. To my ear, a lot of modern sounding players avoid chord tones for extended sections of solos. When something catches my ear and makes me want to start transcribing, invariably it's a clever use of tones that are not obviously related to the COM, bearing in mind, of course, that theorists can find a connection between any interval and a type of soup.
-
]] Originally Posted by christianm77
Mimi Fox has some in her arpeggios book, near the end.
I need to sit down and do a cheat sheet of chord against chord applications, like Abm9 against G7. Or Eb7. Or Bb7 etc.
-
Yeah, I mean TBH Abm9 isn't even CST.... It's pre-CST. Tritone's minor, esp if you have a Gb in there. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Night in Tunisia is a classic example. It has both the Gb and G.
There's not that many relationships to memorise. Here they are:
Family of four of commonly related chords:
G7(9) = Dm(6) = Bm7b5 and also relates to Fmaj7 (or Fmaj7#5)
Main resolutions of dom7 into major (dim symmetry):
G7-->C (so also Dm6-->C etc)
Bb7-->C (so also Dm7b5--->C also use B for the G7b9-->C)
Db7-->C (so Abm-->C etc)
E7-->C
There's more, but that's the basics.... All covered by CST, but I'm framing things perhaps a little differently here. The Barry Harris loosens things up by allowing you to play any arpeggio or chord from the dominant scale or important minor. So in this sense, it's not unlike CST.
Of course all these things (like Barry's theory) fall under the CST umbrella (with some interesting exceptions I haven't covered here) but I don't find much use for the overall CST theory in that environment when constructing traditional language of this kind.
So I see CST as a particular type of tool in the box to be able to dig into some more contemporary sounds. To be honest I don't even think of them as 'jazz' sounds - you could use them for classical compositions. Unlike a well constructed bop line, there's no inherent rhythmic information in a pure intervallic CST structure (but you can introduce it by adding chromaticism.)
I look at things like Nettles/Graf and they want to tell me all the tools come from CST, and that's fine, but I don't find it useful to have an overall theory of jazz in that way, and I find the terminology rather clunky. Also the harmony is not really the challenge in bop - the line construction is more important.
-
Also, for me 'CST scales' are scales which lend themselves to being used in a free way over isolated chords to extend the sound of that chord in some way. So more melodic minor modes, lydian, dorian etc.
Scales that have more of a natural dynamism to them - Harmonic Major and Harmonic Minor for instance, tend to create a natural sense of progression, which is also cool.
-
Does Barry explicitly teach this? Most pianists I've talked to about these relations just see them as inversions, not distinct chords. Originally Posted by christianm77
John
-
He teaches G7(9) = Bm7b5 = Dm6 in various aspects of his teaching. Bm7b5 and Dm6 are effectively inversions, good way to look at it, and Barry favours the m6 nomenclature for half-dim chords. G7(9) is not quite, but is intimately related. Originally Posted by John A.
The Fmaj7 is from the Family of Four, which I get from Sheryl Bailey.
-
Well remember that I post as a Student of Harmony Theory ...learning more Jazz for my Expanded R&B but I do not play or write like a Student. Originally Posted by Jonah
I have written professionally ..people hear things differently - the Person who Pays you is right- lol.
I did not say Classical ' by definition'.
Now people can get real nitpicky about this ...but this Classical Piece should remind most that Chord Melody is NOT dissimilar to certain Classical Pieces..I also said to 'my ears ' so IF you disagree that's fine ..let's not debate and muck up the Thread...I do that enough on my own...lol.
When I said better to know both I probably should have said for Composition..
Although when most Forum Members here Analyze Jazz Harmony - they DO use Classical Functional Analysis - ii- V then down a step another ii-V then down a half step .. to a ii° -Valt.-i
It's NOT a totally different Harmonic Language- so .
Jazz adds Tritone Subs and a few other things but it's really an extension of Classical Harmony not a rethink or different Language. Most of the Alt Chords were already used by Classicists by 1900 right ?
Unless there's some big Jazz Secret ...the Secret Underlying Principle ...never before revealed.
-
Yeah, traditionally jazz musicians have drawn a lot from Debussy and Ravel (as early on as the 20s) because the harmony is more coloristic, perhaps, and adapts better to the jazz approach?
I think Bill Evans also used a lot of Scriabin IIRC
-
If the chart says G7 and I play B-D-F-A (or, more likely, B-F-A-D), functionally, I think of it as a root-less G9 with the third on the bottom, not as a Bm7b5 subbing for a G7. As a shortcut to remembering where to put my fingers I do sometimes think of these as related chords rather than inversions, though. Originally Posted by christianm77
Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
-
Yes, it never occurred to me you can use the reverse, but actually it's a very useful thing. Originally Posted by John A.
For instance, we can look at
Dm7b5 G7b9 Cm
as
Bb7 G7b9 Cm
Bb7 Bo7 Cm
Also,
Fm(maj7) G7b9 Cm
Fm(maj7) Db7 Cm (tritone)
Fm(maj7) Abm(maj7) Cm (m3rd relationship)
Or,
Abmaj7 G7b9 Cm
Abmaj7 Db7 Cm
Abmaj7 Abm(maj7) Cm
(You can also use Abmaj7#5)
Just from those relationships.
-
Heck, at that point, play anything that pulls to Cm...
Abmaj-- Bbmaj--Cm
-
No Stairway here Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
caught that, huh? Man, all my secrets are out... Originally Posted by christianm77
-
I would probably be better off working on a transcription of a solo I don't understand, but here I am, in what often seems like a CST abyss.
I would make this suggestion. I'd like to identify a tune that every agrees is a good one for which to apply CST. And, then, go through, a bar at a time, how CST informs a solo.
ESP?
Dolphin Dance?
Dolores?
Tame Thy Pen?
Maiden Voyage?
Other suggestions?
I just skimmed several volume of Nettle's Berklee Harmony book. It was helpful to finally see careful definitions of some terms that I encountered in many posts but never formally learned. The books are filled with guidance (well, rules, but they aren't strict) about what to play in a large number of situations.
I still have my doubts that this is the best way to learn, but in an academic environment, I can see the advantage of some common language.
It's complicated enough that it seems to me that learning the ropes one tune at a time makes sense. Put on a nice, slow backing track, and, for each chord in each tune, run through the chord tones, tensions and whatever is left, one note at a time. After you're done that for 100 or so of the most played tunes, you're likely have a pretty good -- and practical -- idea of how to use a lot of sounds.
-
I might have suggested a tune, once or 42 times in this godforsaken thread
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I might have suggested a tune, once or 42 times in this godforsaken thread
I hope you don't expect me to re-read it!
I recall a mention of Pee Wee, but I don't know that tune. So, I just picked some from the Real Book.
My preference would be Dolphin Dance, unless I still don't understand which tunes are appropriate for the sort of CST analysis that some are talking about.
As far as I can tell from reading Nettles, it works with any tune. Some people are suggesting that it isn't necessary for functional harmony and therefore might suggest a non-functional, or is it dysfunctional?, tune.
-
I am quite open fo discussion... Originally Posted by Robertkoa
I do not get what you mean by Chord Melody... usually it's just an arrangement for solo unccaompanied guitar... though the name is really misleading.
I did not get the reference to Claire de Lune in that context... I understand that you hear something in realtaion but what is it - that is in realtion to Chord Melody specificallly? Texture?
As per classical harmony... Debussy or Ravel are quite special movement in music - in a way it is very separate from mainstream... the harmonic tools they used are often quite far form traditional means of classical tonality.
And about altered - you say tha 'most of altered chords were used by classicits by 1900'... yes but again if we speak about traditional classical harmony alteration was used in a very specific way... we need samples to compare... I think it wasy mostly applied in a different way it is used in jazz.
Also
That's true but let's see what is 'ii-v' in jazz analyziz and in classical... in classical it's a cadential turnaround of the form S-D... (as well as in orginal jazz standards usually). It's very important 'cause it's structural element of composition.Although when most Forum Members here Analyze Jazz Harmony - they DO use Classical Functional Analysis - ii- V then down a step another ii-V then down a half step .. to a ii° -Valt.-i
In jazz localization of conception of secondary dominant... its aplication has almost nothing to do with the form...
imho 'ii-v' in jazz is a sort of harmonic mode.
so it has the same functional key-oriented hearing as basis... but it is used in very different.
One of the main difference is something that I call 'moveable tonic'... to develope harmony or improvizational idea jazz players usingfthis imply local temporary tonics all the time.. these tonics are conventional and they so not have realtion to tonal plan of the composition... there are no real modulations in that sense.
Which is actually quite opposite to classical harmonic language....
-
I say, for me, everything is always I (one), one way or another. Originally Posted by Jonah
-
You mean...? I guess... but just to be sure?I say, for me, everything is always I (one), one way or another.
-
Don't look at me. I at least listened to it. :P Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I might have suggested a tune, once or 42 times in this godforsaken thread
-
I was hanging at another one of the talks with old Jazz cat and thought something discussed for a minute relates to this thread.
Talking about Bird, Diz, Monk, and others and how they didn't discuss music musical terms if someone asked a question the other(s) would just play as their answer. That pretty well known that is was all about ear to them, but this time a bit more was said. It started when it was mentioned that Dizzy said he never knew what Parker actually knew about music/theory that when they got together they sit and play for each other.
This time they said it was because they didn't know what background someone did or didn't have, but they knew if the person heard it, then they could view it from whatever background they knew or their own ear based knowledge. This to me relates to another conversation when it was said everyone hears and sees things differently because everyone hearing and eyesight is different. So what green looks like to me isn't going to be the same at you and more important to this conversation if what that note sounds like the context of the music isn't going to be the same as you. So the old Masters by just playing to answer questions were letting the person who asked the question interpret it in however fits how they hear and with whatever terms they want to use to categorize it.
So all this talk about CST doesn't make sense in long run it's just a system to categorize what you hear. Someone who studied and like another system going to hear the same sounds and relate to it in their system of choice so no one system is better than another. The real answers are listening and playing and someone else nodding smiling or not.
I said smiling because I read a few time in biography's of the masters some kid would ask a question and get a answer played to them. Then the kid would play and wait to get if they got a smile or the head shaking. They kid might come back another time and play again and again until they got the smile.
So not a comment on value of CST, but on the use for systems which CST is one of.
Mas cafe con leche por favor!
-
I'm the wrong person to being this, since I don't claim to know anything about CST, but here goes.
Dolphin Dance, RB changes. This is practice room analysis. On the bandstand I'd probably be thinking only that the drummer is too loud.
Ebmaj7 -- Eb Ionian and I might raise the 4th.
Dbmaj7/Eb -- I don't really know what to make of the chord symbol. I know that it spells a Dbmaj9, but, more likely, I'd continue to think about Ebmaj -- and flat the D. Probably leave the Gnat. That means, Db lydian, I guess
Ebmaj7 -- I'd probably develop whatever I played in Bar 1, basically moving the Db back to D.
Dm7b5 G7 Cm7 -- a minor ii V I. Given that I've been in Eb for three bars, I might assume that the G7 is really a G7b13, but I guess it does not have to be. I'd be thinking chord tones, or CHM or FMM.
Ab7b5 .-- this is an unexpected chord and I don't know how to analyze it. It has some notes of D7 (which is the chord two bars later). The choices that would occur to me would be WT or Ab lydian dominant.
Cm7 -- I could simply stay in Eb (C aeolian). The melody doesn't point towards one minor scale or another.
Am7 D7 G -- tonal center Gmaj. The melody note over the Am7 is a D, so I probably want to avoid playing an Eb right there although it could work on the D7.
Abm7 Db7 -- sounds to me like a chromatic ascent, even though the tonal center seems to go down a half step.. I'd probably play something similar to what I played the bar before over G, but move it up a half step and adjust the line to the key of Gb.
Enough for now.
Can anybody explain how CST would apply to these 10 bars?
-
What are they teaching them these days? Ab7b5 is really common in Cm (and C). Really it should be written Ab7#11. You find it often in classical music where it is called Aug 6th (Ab7#11 is a French Sixth in this case.)
Your scale choices here are cool. What I would go for.
But Ab7#11 isn't very far away from C natural minor - there's only one non-diatonic note:
Ab C Eb Gb D
The Gb is our familiar blues note in the minor key.... So don't write oFf the very simple option of playing a blues line here.
Reply With Quote
Autumn Leaves (Fingerstyle Chord Melody)
Yesterday, 11:56 PM in Improvisation