-
JonR...top notch post...I thought Bill Evans at once..the classical/jazz morph..intervallic voice movement with chromatic chord melody .. his use of static chords are refreshing rather than boring..Blue in Green though fairly simple in concept is my fave example of jazz..tonal or modal..
-
12-03-2016 03:34 PM
-
Woah. Good post JonR. I guess we are thinking along the same lines....
-
Minor on dominant is a thing, tho.
-
Re Melodic Minor and a couple of things from other posts,
Chords are derived from scales and the Altered scale IS Derived from Melodic Minor, it does not exist it other 7 note scales
1. Diatonic seven chords are not the same spelling as Function seventh and yield very differnt sounds yet Function the same,
2. Holsdworth is probably the prime exponent of this, i am sure there are keyboard players who do this but its not so visible from a guitar perspective it is highly visible because in order to play those chords big stretches needed.
also AH builds chords from scales and voices them the way he wants.
3. I have yet to encounter a chord with every extension & 3 & 7 melodic minor DIATONIC 7th 4 note tonic chord is the same as Harmonic Minor.
Jonr you are right in the Melodic Minor Myth sense, because there are literally no exclusively Melodic Minor tunes i know of, they do employ use MM and some modal interchange, it would be possible to use pure melodic minor,
re: Wholetone occasionally emerges as another altered dominant scale.
wholetone is a scale by it self to be used where you can use it, not specifically dominant, but yes it is normally used over dom. it is difficult to use as is Diminished elsewhere without careful handling.
-
If we are talking about the history. I hear much more whole tone scale than altered in the historical tradition that I have studied - Bud Powell uses it a lot for instance.
As far as the altered scale/mel minor modes. Well, let's take the melody of Night in Tunisia as an example. Here we have a melody that clearly outlines an Bbm(add9) arpeggio before resolving to an A on the chord of Dm.
Now, someone who has grown up with CST will likely say right away that these notes are clearly belonging to the Bb melodic minor scale, which we can run as a Lydian Dominant on Db7 or an Altered Scale on A7. And looking at the notes, you couldn't say they were wrong, exactly.
However, in my understanding (heavily influenced by Barry Harris and Charlie Christian for instance) I simply see that as a melodic line on the Bb minor chord resolving to Dm. This is a common move, and BH would call it 'tritone's minor.' The scale in question would likely be a melodic minor or dorian (i.e. raised 6th.) It's my belief that this is how it was viewed in earlier decades - minor on dominant.
So in this sense, yes they did use melodic minor modes on dominants. Stephan Grappeli and Django did this as did Charlie Christian etc, albeit they were thinking of the minor root, not a mode.
However, to me the whole issue of whether or not melodic minor harmony is a thing historically (i.e. before people started doing it on purpose after the 60s) hinges on whether or not that maj7 in the scale is prolonged. Is it a note that people feel they can 'sit on' as opposed to simply using it as a passing tone on their way to the 1?
It's one of tells of a modern player - if they sit on that note, at least to my ears. AFAIK the pre 60s guys did not tend to do this.
Of course, in general CST has developed to the point where certain scales can be used very freely on chords - the Gary Burton school.
E.g. if I start playing lines based on 4ths on a melodic minor, I have well and truly entered the contemporary jazz age harmonically.
This is not how the scales were used in the bop era and earlier. So in a sense, it's not the scales that have changed exactly, more the way they are used.
Also at some point, someone decided natural 4th on dom 7 was a problem. Charlie Parker, for instance, uses 4 on dom 7 all the time, so it's another aspect of a more modern style.
As far as 7#11 sounds in pre CST jazz go (for want of a better term) there are some big examples - Take the A Train is a very well known example, and the #11 in this case G# in the C major key on the D7 chord, is not naturally part of the key. Modern players would use D lydian dominant/A melodic minor here, but it appears from my listening so far, whole tone was a much more common choice on this chord, if indeed the #11 was expressed at all.
Counter examples would be received with some interest. More research to be done. Big subject!Last edited by christianm77; 12-03-2016 at 06:56 PM.
-
Carol Kaye would love it too!
Originally Posted by JonR
Quote of the week. Love it!
-
the point of my post was to point out in my post without being rude,
Chords are derived from scales and the Altered scale IS Derived from Melodic Minor,
was trying to be diplomatic with wholetone which actually goes way back, and like diminished can be vused over
major harmony and not just dominants as was implied by others members posts.
Melodic Minor is not a myth, sometimes difficult to determine is what scales/modes are being used ie
if no b6 or 6 is present in a minor scale that has a M7 is it Harm or MM.
ia post implied altered was not derived from MMin it IS
no Mel Min mode 7 Altered is a scale that can be employed over certain altered dom chords even min7 if you want,
the chords come these scales. That is all.
People often confuse using a scale and thing thats the harmony ir if using a Melodic Minor scale it melodic Minor.
Mc MaCartneys Yesterday has Melodic Minor a portion of the scale this does not make it MMin.
-
Originally Posted by Durban
Scales can be derived from chords also.
Altered scale is not necessarily derived from MM. I derive it this way mostly, but in fact the altered scale is just all the flats off the root, as well.
Here's a video of my concept of Altered scale as an operation or process you apply to material. I've got some good mileage out of this.
was trying to be diplomatic with wholetone which actually goes way back, and like diminished can be vused over
major harmony and not just dominants as was implied by others members posts.
Melodic Minor is not a myth, sometimes difficult to determine is what scales/modes are being used ie
if no b6 or 6 is present in a minor scale that has a M7 is it Harm or MM.
ia post implied altered was not derived from MMin it IS
no Mel Min mode 7 Altered is a scale that can be employed over certain altered dom chords even min7 if you want,
the chords come these scales. That is all.
Well, I just think it's all minor minor, with all the wiggle room that entails.
Raised 6th is common in jazz. But the 7 can be M7 or b7 interchangeably - listen to Wes soloing on Nica's dream for instance.
If you do go and sit on the M7 of the minor scale, you are doing some melodic minor harmony.
Harmonic minor has some specific applications - usually when tonicising a target minor chord in bebop.
People often confuse using a scale and thing thats the harmony ir if using a Melodic Minor scale it melodic Minor.Yes.
Mc MaCartneys Yesterday has Melodic Minor a portion of the scale this does not make it MMin.
-
Melodic minor is a scale. It isn't functional though.
I think you're both saying the same things in different ways.
If you play in harmonic minor, harmonic minor is the reference for the harmony, and melodically for all of the extensions.
Melodic minor, on the other hand - as it is used in jazz - isn't functioning harmonically. The ii doesn't function as a ii mostly and the vii doesn't function as a vii. The reference for harmonic usages of melodic minor is mainly in its similarities to note sets from other scales, mostly harmonic minor I'd think.
The Altered scale is only a degree or two of separation from the V7 or harmonic minor. That's what makes it "work". Your ear hears it as basically being much more like that than anything else, and almost can't help hearing it in that context. The same is true for lydian #2 and the ii chord of harmonic minor. Your ear doesn't particularly care that it's the 7th scale degree of melodic minor. The note set, from the root is very analogous to the ii7b5's mode from HM. In the same way, your ear doesn't care that phyrgian dominant is the 3rd scale degree of HM. It's perfectly happy hearing it as a dominant scale, because it is - when you look at the notes. It's so similar to the V7 that your ear hears it that way. Your ear hears note sets mostly and doesn't really discern scale degrees of arbitrary, non-functional scales.
I'm not a theoretician, so take this with a grain of salt. Talking out of my arse, but that's what I get from a few years of reading this B.S. on the forum and from playing a little HM and MM.
-
Some are, certainly. Others just appear to be, but are in fact derived by altering existing chords. (I hope I'm not being rude either Originally Posted by Durban
- this is my understanding of conventional theory.)
To say something "IS" means it's a fact which can be proved. I would love to see it proved, personally, so if you can give me some links or resources that would be great. (Class me as a sceptic who needs to be converted Originally Posted by Durban
)
Personally I find it more useful to see it as deriving from the functional practice of altering or substituting dom7 chords to create chromatic voice-leading. That's how the scale works in practice - providing chromatic passing notes to the tonic - so that seems the simple view to me. The fact it resembles a mode of melodic minor tells me nothing of any use.
But I can see that - if you know your melodic minor scales - it's handy way of remembering the scale. I just prefer to work from chords, which I accept is a personal choice. YMMV
I think we're probably just misunderstanding each other. Originally Posted by Durban
Can you give an example of wholetone or diminished used over "major harmony" (and maybe define what you mean by "major harmony")? (I know those scales can be used as "outside" phrasing, but I'd say they imply a dominant function when they do so.)
I know melodic minor exists in minor keys. It's a common alteration of the key scale, for melodic purposes (hence the name); and (in jazz) is used to harmonise the tonic. Originally Posted by Durban
I'm aware the theory of "melodic minor harmony" extends beyond that, I just haven't seen a practical use for it myself. I don't know of music which requires that interpretation above all others. It may well exist
.
I mean, I understand that various modes of melodic minor happen to match certain other common jazz chords, and that those modes have the useful quality of "no avoid notes". The link between these disparate chords and the melodic minor scale is an interesting (and conceptually useful) one, but not a causal one IMO. The chords can be explained in other ways, to do with context, voice-leading and consonant extensions. I.e., from practical contingency first, not theoretical concept.
Yes. I'm only saying that the resemblance between 7th mode of melodic minor and the altered scale is a coincidence. Originally Posted by Durban
That is, I don't believe anyone sat down with melodic minor and decided to apply the 7th mode to a dom7 chord, thereby discovering loads of cool alterations. What happened (and it goes back to classical theory) is that chromatic harmony was employed to provide more interesting voice moves and chord resolutions. When you take a dom7 and alter both the 5th and 9th - in order to make cool moves to tonic chord tones - you end up with a set of 7 notes which happens to resemble 7th mode of melodic minor. Great! That's a handy (but musically meaningless) memory aid. The melodic minor link certainly doesn't explain anything.
Another way of looking at it, which I quite like, is that the tritone sub (evolving from the classical augmented 6th chord, or perhaps the neapolitan chord) could be the source of the altered dom7, and not vice versa. At least the two are intimately related, being essentially the same collection of voice moves, just with a different bass note. And of course the resulting scale (adding up all the possible chord tones) is the same.
Sorry I don't follow that. Originally Posted by Durban
I actually think that's a reasonable example of classical melodic minor - ascending only, coming back down as natural minor. Not sure what you mean by "this does not make it MMin" - it's a minor scale with a raised 6th and 7th degree, what else is it? Originally Posted by Durban
Of course, it's nothing to do with jazz, or with the jazz theory of "melodic minor harmony"Last edited by JonR; 12-04-2016 at 08:20 AM.
-
That's a great perspective Jon, but what do make of tritone substitutes and the use of minor key material on dominants as used in Barry Harris's system?
-
I my world, there are 2 scales - major and minor. (So in my happy place, there is really only one!). Everything else can be looked at as a subtle or not so subtle alteration of that group of notes. Thank you, Jimmy Bruno for teaching me that. If you want to call every slight alteration to the scale a different scale or mode name, that may be ok for you, but not for me. I certainly understand the theory and it makes perfect sense to me, but for years it was an insurmountable hindrance to playing the guitar.
David Baker once said to me, "Scott, it's a guitar." He could see that I was trying to turn every concept into some intellectual, gymnastic fretboard art.
-
Ok, updated the scales menu. "dLoc" button to open menus. MegaEar
It even plays them but that needs installing a midi driver in w10.. or enabling it on iOS somehow.. and a softsynth or.. yeah. Doesn't matter. The list is there. Probably with some mistakes also
-
'None of these young cats can play a triplet because they spend all their time looking at mode books' Originally Posted by ScottM
and
'You tried to be clever, but that's not how music is' Barry Harris (of course)
-
I've never read Barry Harris's system. I'd instinctively have the utmost respect for him, but I'm also instinctively suspicious of "systems". Originally Posted by christianm77
For me, the tritone sub works the same way as the altered dominant. It is the same chord, essentially. It's all about maximum chromatic voice-leading to tonic chord tones (including consonant extensions like 6 or 9), while preserving the dominant note and the diatonic guide tones. That set of notes produces either the altered dominant or the lydian dominant tritone sub, depending which note we put in the bass.
The fact that set of notes matches a mode of melodic minor is pure coincidence, but nevertheless a handy one - assuming we know our melodic minor scales well enough.
I'm afraid I've no idea, as I say, where Barry Harris goes with that - i.e. what "minor key material" might mean, beyond that melodic minor connection. What other material is there in this context, besides those 7 notes? The 5 chromatics? Which we know are always available anyway. (disregarding other dom7 scale applications of course, such as the diminished scale and its slightly different set of chromatics).
If you can put it in a nutshell - or suggest a link - that would be great. You never know, I might learn something!
Last edited by JonR; 12-06-2016 at 07:46 AM.
-
Yes. The view from the top of the mountain is always much simpler than when you're climbing up it. Originally Posted by ScottM
-
There is a system to bebop, not just BH's system, though BH teaches it perhaps most coherently. Originally Posted by JonR
Anyway, this is going to get long. Sorry.
For me, the tritone sub works the same way as the altered dominant. It is the same chord, essentially. It's all about maximum chromatic voice-leading to tonic chord tones (and consonant extensions like 6 or 9), while preserving the dominant note and the diatonic guide tones. That set of notes produces either the altered dominant or the lydian dominant tritone sub, depending which note we put in the bass.It's very hard to dispute this, but it's also very hard to confirm it.The fact that set of notes matches a mode of melodic minor is pure coincidence, but nevertheless a handy one - assuming we know our melodic minor scales well enough.
A very simple example are the melodies to say, Swing 42, Lady be Good and Lambeth Walk. The melodies, to my way of understanding, outline the I chord (triad or 6) and the iim6 over V7. That's not the only way of understanding it, but it is the Gypsy Jazz way (the way we use m6 grips as dom7 grips) and it is also the Barry Harris way of understanding it.
That suggests to me that minor over dominant was a concept in use during the 30s - 50s but I have no clinching proof for that.
When I transcribe a lick of Django's, Parker or Christian on a dominant chord, more often than not it sounds to me like a minor 6th, or, a minor 6th type scale (Dorian descending, melodic minor ascending, but not always.)
Now furthermore, if we check out Miles's solo on So What, that is exactly what he does on the D Dorian tonality. Miles was heavily influenced by Charlie Christian, and we can hear the same tendency to hear melodic minor and dorian as the ascending and descending forms of a minor 6th scale. They aren't going to play natural or harmonic minor, BTW, because that wouldn't have that minor/dominant duality.
Obviously this ties into the all important ii-V relationship. In the understanding of Barry, and I think many bop players, the ii-V is essentially one thing. BH says dominant (and important minor), Martino would say minor, Berklee teaches 'ii-V' lines and so on, but it doesn't matter.
The important thing for the jazz improvisor is to recognise the essential unity between dominant and m6, and that this sound can be suspended or softened by using a b7 instead of the 6th. Having a whole scale to play with opens up the extensions and family of four type stuff. This can be framed in different ways, but it's the same stuff that everyone played.
The minor iv on V7 is also a very common move during this era of music. Especially with the raised 4th degree of the iv scale (1 if we look at it as a bVII7 backdoor) we get the default 7b9 sound of this era. This is sound CST texts normally miss, for some reason, perhaps because they are IMO over concerned with vertical 'clashes' such as b7 or 4 against a dom7, which were manifestly common in swing and bop eras.
Now the final link in the chain is the practice of tritone substitution. Tritone subsitution Obviously, you can tritone substitute a minor chord if you accept that the m6 is the same thing as a dom7, and this leads to the possibility of an altered scale, which early on AFAIK was only used in ascending scale runs, but later on became a harmonic sound in its own right (as these things often do.)
It makes sense to me to interpret the Night in Tunisia melody as a minor arpeggio on a dominant. The dom in question is Eb7 and the arp is Bb minor, but it's a short leap from there to playing the Bb minor arp on A7, and then it's a short leap to play the (ascending) m6 scale from there. Boom, altered scale.
Barry's system covers these possibilities elegantly, but as I have been at pains to point out, there are many ways to understand this and to frame it for the student. You can use a scalic understanding (BH), or you can use a chordal/subsitute based understanding (Carol Kaye etc) - up to you.
Well it means music in a minor key.I'm afraid I've no idea, as I say, where Barry Harris goes with that - i.e. what "minor key material" might mean, beyond that melodic minor connection. What other material is there in this context, besides those 7 notes? The 5 chromatics? Which we know are always available anyway. (disregarding other dom7 scale applications of course, such as the diminished scale and its slightly different set of chromatics).
Re: melodic minor harmony myth - well, demonstrably there is such a thing as bop era players using a B on an F7, and so on.
I have to back away from my earlier posts, because I am starting to think of lot of examples!
You play music in a minor key. For example, take the last phrase on the B section of Anthropology, and notice how over the F7 chord (or Cm7 F7 ii V), Bird uses the outline of a Cm triad with some syncopated use of the classic 1-7-b7-6. Actually as he sits on 7 for a little while (effectively), we could say that this is an early use of Lydian Dominant harmony (CST), or if you are a BH disciple, the line simply sits on the 7 of the important minor scale.
There's also kind of a II7#11 in Little Willie Leaps by Miles, penultimate phrase of the first half ends on C# over G7. That's pretty unambiguous. Miles seems to be thinking C minor on F.
So thinking about it, I am overstating the case. I think the use of these Lydian Dominant sounds emerged intuitively from the minor on dominant practice.
Anyway, tritone sub that, and you have altered. I agree that altered scale per se not used much in the bop era, but check out the middle 8 of Hot House. Check out the unambiguous use of a B minor triad over the F7 chord. Also in the 2nd A section we have what looks like a m7b5nat9 arpeggio on the Gm7b5 and Fm7b5 (so he's thinking of them perhaps as Bbm6(maj7) and Abm6(maj7). That's pretty unambigiously melodic minor even if he didn't (probably) think of these things as Locrian natural 2.
During the bop era, m7b5 was still thought an inversion of m6 (I think of it like that TBH, again Barry's influence.)
Anyway, food for thought. CST isn't all BS, I would suggest.
Minor key material is not Barry speak, that's me, BTW.
Ha! This is as nutshelly as I get. But - learn the ii-V relationship is hardly unknown to most jazz students. The interesting bit is really the way BH uses the scale to develop useful material. And that isn't nutshell-able really... The first DVD on this covers about 4 or 5 sides of A4 in super condensed form.If you can put it in a nutshell - or suggest a link - that would be great.Last edited by christianm77; 12-06-2016 at 10:16 AM.
-
I knew an alto player who was a good player but was hung up on scales and what "key" the tune was in. I told him it really wasn't like that and he said "Yeah I guess not. I was playing with a guy once and kept asking him what the key was and he told me "just make up your own key".
-
so is it better to look at modes as alterations of the major scale or as separate scales......I guess that is up each person....
-
For me... both... and also neither. Originally Posted by artcore
But like you said... it's up to each person.
-
Bring it on! Originally Posted by christianm77
But that's nothing to do with melodic minor modes. It's just conflating ii with V, or adding extensions to V. After all a iim6 is just a rootless V9. Originally Posted by christianm77
Melodic minor ascending? I'd like to see/hear examples of that (from that era). I imagine it's about a chromatic approach (C# to D on a Dm7 or G7 chord) - if so I'm not sure it helps to see it as melodic minor. But I'd love to see some examples. Originally Posted by christianm77
IIRC, Miles does use the raised 7th occasionally in So What, which is a classic melodic minor device - nothing revolutionary there or even very jazzy)! It's still not addressing the issue I'm interested in though, which is the notion of 7th mode of melodic minor on a dom7. Originally Posted by christianm77
Still talking diatonic harmony here... (unless that m6 is really playes with a maj7 too.) Originally Posted by christianm77
Ah ha! Borrowed minor iv, and borrowed minor key V7... Originally Posted by christianm77
OK.... ! Originally Posted by christianm77
Yes, my thinking exactly. The A7 would obviously give you the raised 7th of the Bbm6 scale. But it starts (seemingly) from the tritone sub. Once you use Eb7 (replacing A7) to resolve to Dm, then the collection of pitches available on Eb7/A7 is pretty much given. And I can see how the melodic minor connection could have been made then. Originally Posted by christianm77
But it's still just spotting the resemblance. Nobody took the melodic minor scale and applied the 7th mode to a dominant chord. They altered the dominant chord - in various ways over time - until it became a full tritone sub, and then - adding up all the notes - hey, look, it's a melodic minor scale!
Right. The latter is always the one that's made most sense to me. (I had no idea it was Kaye's perspective, but I know it's shared by many jazz musicians.) Originally Posted by christianm77
Yes, but only a scale-based perspective would interpret that as lydian dominant, or (by further extension) C melodic minor. If I see or hear a B used on an F7 chord, I'd probably hear it as a chromatic approach to the C. There might be examples where a scale interpretation makes best sense of a particular phrase, but there would be others where it doesn't. Originally Posted by christianm77
I see his use of B natural there as part of an "enclosure". It works for me as an embellishment of the C chord tone, preceding it with B-D. He plays a passing Bb in the next bar, which (for me) argues against a scale interpretation. You'd have to be a disciple of CST to see it that way (some imaginative reverse engineering). What I see all over Parker's solos is chord tones and melodic embellishment. You can often focus in closer and interpret some phrases as scale-based, but IMO it tells you nothing of any use. It would be like looking at this sentence I'm typing and saying "ah yes, he's using the English alphabet there..." Originally Posted by christianm77
However, in the bridge of his first solo on that tune (if we accept the Omnibook's transcription), there's a couple of much clearer pointers. On the 2nd bar of the D7 he plays a Cm7b5 (Ebm6) arpeggio - that's damn close to a D altered scale; missing the D which would confirm it, but I guess the chord root itself takes care of that. And then he does the same thing - more briefly - on the 2nd bar of the G7 (Fm7b5/Abm6 arp). Hard to dispute an altered scale interpretation of that! The phrases still work melodically by chromatic resolution to "inside" notes, but those arps are clear enough.
Right. Originally Posted by christianm77
Accepted. The only thing I don't like is it often seems to be the only game in town. Maybe jazz educators take the melodic/rhythmic imperative for granted, but if so they shouldn't. You can't train someone to improvise by just giving them the right chord-scales. Originally Posted by christianm77
IOW, the BS element is the notion (maybe not overtly stated, but often implicitly accepted) that CST is a method of improvisation. It isnt; it's just a way of organising the material available. And IMHO you don't actually need that organisation if you know chords well enough, and understand the principles of chromatic approach and enclosure - the way you can group sets of chromatics in outside arpeggios or phrases, provided you come out on the inside.Last edited by JonR; 12-14-2016 at 06:35 AM.
-
Yeah, I have a feeling we may be going too far into splitting hairs here.
So: my basic thesis on the use of melodic minor harmony in pre-Berklee jazz is this. Let me know which of these points you dispute and why. I would like to know.
1) There is such a practice as playing minor arpeggios and scales on a root a fifth up from the root of a dom7 in prewar jazz and bebop. I'll refer to this as important minor.
2) The (jazz) melodic minor and dorian mode are both used. Scales are present as an improvisation tool in this music (how could they not) but we are in general talking about stepwise scales, or familiar patterns like scales in thirds, not the CST idea of 'scale as a palette of good sounding notes' approach (note scales as Kaye would call them.)
3) The concept of stacking up a scale in thirds is definitely already present in the early bop era, and may in fact date back to the swing era. In this we see the first glimmerings of a theoretical unification between scales and harmony.
4) The important minor can be substituted for a tritone substitute because it's related dominant can. As a result, it now becomes possible to play Ab minor into C and so on.
5) It therefore follows that you can play minor scales on the substitute too. This leads towards the altered scale. Barry Harris teaches this as tritone's minor, incidentally - the important minor of the tritone sub dominant. I cannot think of an offhand unambiguous example of a melodic minor scale being used on the tritone in bebop, but maybe others can.
6) The leading tone (7) of the important minor is sometimes left unresolved in scalar phrases in bebop. This creates a #11 on the related dominant and is an example of what is now call 'melodic minor' harmony.
7) I'm certainly not disputing that many examples of chromaticism in jazz lines are generated essentially by voice leading (I have a video on it and everything!) and have nothing to do with scales. Indeed, some examples of these run exactly contrary to CST practices, which results in some interesting mental contortions from CST purists.
8) Lastly Barry Harris teaches scales scales scales. He doesn't teach CST. Now, while BH's approach may in fact not be necessarily 'historical' it seems to me to reflect historical practice, and he has been thinking about it for a LONG time. Also, his approach spits out authentic sounding bebop lines based on scales. It amazed me how much he emphasised scales in his approach - I had never considered bop players were doing anything other than embellish arpeggios. In fact, his system now makes total sense to me as a way of understanding bebop common practice, but it's taken a decade for me. It's not an all embracing harmonic theory - it's a 'how to' guide.
The main things to have changed in straight ahead jazz since the 50's harmonically are (IMO)
- the move towards 7th chords as the basic unit of harmony (rather than 6th chords and triads)
- the move away from using harmonic minor as a way to play minor ii-V-I's and V-I's, and towards the use of V altered.
- the move towards making everything into ii-V's (already in progress during the bop era) even if they don't resolve.
- the move towards using scales that don't contain 'avoid notes' including Lydian Dominant on V
- the move towards more 'random' intervallic uses of scales.
But I actually think this was a very organic process. Blue Note era harmony is different to early Bop harmony, for instance.
Personally, I now use a mix of arpeggios and scale based improvising. I got a bit bored with chord tone improvisation a year or two ago and have moved towards a much more scalic understanding. But I'm very glad I went through 10 years of playing on the chord tones.
BTW, do you know the head Hot House? That's an interesting one to study, and it's also quite early on (1945) in the bebop era. There are some cases of what I am talking about, including what I would think of as examples of Melodic Minor harmony. Might be an interesting topic of discussion.Last edited by christianm77; 12-14-2016 at 09:12 AM.
-
Maybe! Originally Posted by christianm77
I think the issue here is whether the 7th of the minor chord is incorporated (sus4 on the V7). Just because an arpeggio or scale starts from the 5th of the chord doesn't warrant calling it "minor", IMO. (If we play D dorian mode on a G7, we call it G mixolydian, right? Originally Posted by christianm77
) As I say, a min7 arp would make the choice (ii7 over V7) a lot clearer.
Again, if you mean dorian from the 5th of V, that's just mixolydian. Or the scale of the key, as they probably thought of it back then. If there are melodic minor examples (ie producing a lydian dominant V7), that's more interesting. Originally Posted by christianm77
OK. I'd say that was just one way of looking at it - depends on your perspective. If the diatonic scale is being used, there's no sense in giving it modal names on each chord - if only because, pre-1959, nobody had any idea about modes. If notes are altered from the diatonic scale, I'd relate that to the chord: chromatic embellishment or voice-leading. I wouldn't feel it necessary to identify a scale, although I have no problem with those who do. I prefer the "horizontal" (linear) view to the vertical chord-scale one. (I realise they are not mutually exclusive Originally Posted by christianm77
.)
Or simply spelling chord tones? It obviously depends on what stack of 3rds we're talking about. Those examples I gave from Anthropology definitely seem to indicate a concept of superimposing one chord on another, to create dissonance (alterations, not extensions) - which, if you add in the (original) chord tones, is going to imply some kind of scale. Originally Posted by christianm77
Yes, I see the argument here. If players really did think that playing a V7 from the 5th was a kind of "minor" (ii over V), then that would lead logically to a lydian dominant scale on the tritone sub - which is the altered V scale - because the dominant note needs to be retained. I.e., the normal Ab minor scale (or Ab dorian) won't work on a G7. You need both F and G, making melodic minor. Originally Posted by christianm77
I still prefer to see that pitch collection as the total of available notes: chord tones and alterations (in either the V7 or bII7), created to provide chromatic voice-leading on to the tonic. It's probably just me, but I don't find the melodic minor connection offers me anything I don't already know just from looking at the chords. I know when I first learned about the altered scale, it made little sense to me until I realised how it worked melodically (voice-leading). Once you see that, you don't need the chord-scale concept, IMO. You can see the purpose of altered chord tones (or the tritone sub), and that's all you need.
Those phrases in Anthropology could be interpreted as that (Ebm6 arp on a D7 - important minor of the tritone sub, yes?). Originally Posted by christianm77
Can you give examples of that (recordings or transcriptions)? Originally Posted by christianm77
I still don't see what purpose calling it "melodic minor harmony" serves, however. It's just a label which tells us nothing of any practical use (tells me nothing anyhow).
I do understand the process you're outlining of beginning with a "ii over V" idea, and then converting both to the tritone sub. I guess I'm looking at it from the other end of the telescope. I'm not so much interested in how they got there (unless there really are quotes from the old jazz masters on the subject), I find I see all I need from looking back from now - i.e., reading chord symbols or transcriptions, listening to the actual playing. The ruling concept for me is voice-leading.
Ah ha! Originally Posted by christianm77
Interesting, thanks. Charlie Parker (supposedly) did say "Learn all your scales, then forget em all and just play". There's definitely evidence of scalar thinking in his solos, along with the arps and chromatics. Originally Posted by christianm77
Really? I always thought it was altered on V and lydian dominant on bII. I realise there are exceptions, but surely it's more common that way? (Rest all agreed.) Originally Posted by christianm77
Not quite sure what that might mean. Originally Posted by christianm77
You're now touching on my ignorance... Originally Posted by christianm77
I think this comes down to personal taste in the end. I still think melody and rhythm, based on chord tones and chromatics (have done for 50 years, pretty much!). I don't really like to hear improvisation which sounds scalar. Originally Posted by christianm77
I'll check it out, thanks. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
So agreed. I myself can clearly understand Parker's thinking about every line he ever played by using the 6 basic melodic embellishments, chord tone targeting, the several variations of enclosures, and arpeggios (outlining). And of course some blues scale (an African American original invention!). And in a few cases Parker might use: diminished scale shapes (Debussy, Ravel), and whole tone scale shapes (Monk, Debussy). Originally Posted by JonR
Bring it on!
I see his use of B natural there as part of an "enclosure". It works for me as an embellishment of the C chord tone, preceding it with B-D. He plays a passing Bb in the next bar, which (for me) argues against a scale interpretation. You'd have to be a disciple of CST to see it that way (some imaginative reverse engineering). What I see all over Parker's solos is chord tones and melodic embellishment. You can often focus in closer and interpret some phrases as scale-based, but IMO it tells you nothing of any use. It would be like looking at this sentence I'm typing and saying "ah yes, he's using the English alphabet there..."
No need for Barry Harris or melodic minor (Levine) and I thoroughly understand those two perspectives and am quite able to think that way if I choose. But I tend function less melodically when I do so by the very nature of those being note grouping organizing systems. They are great for runs though! I don't want to think about chord tone targets or melody shapes for that matter when I am doing a long cross octave scale run. At the end of the run then I think chord tone target devices.Last edited by rintincop; 12-14-2016 at 04:00 PM.
-
Bro, you are thorough. I'm not making this shit up. I have come to my conclusions through looking at actual music. I'll try and give examples:
Dm6 arp seems pretty easy to me. I would say to a student - want a swing sound? Play Dm6 on G7. Or more generally, m6 a fifth up. Simple, clear, if you know your cycle. Originally Posted by JonR
Maybe!
I think the issue here is whether the 7th of the minor chord is incorporated (sus4 on the V7). Just because an arpeggio or scale starts from the 5th of the chord doesn't warrant calling it "minor", IMO. (If we play D dorian mode on a G7, we call it G mixolydian, right?) As I say, a min7 arp would make the choice (ii7 over V7) a lot clearer.
If minor arps, why not scales? Anyway, maybe G mixo/dominant. Sure. The reasons why I think not are outlined below.
I don't. I mean dorian on minor chords. The most glaring example I can think of is the use of the dorian mode in the melody on the Abm6 and Am6 chords in the bridge of Douce Ambiance by Django, but other examples would include Six Appeal. I was quite surprised when I started seeing the dorian everywhere because I was so conditioned to think it was all chord tones and embellishments.Again, if you mean dorian from the 5th of V, that's just mixolydian. Or the scale of the key, as they probably thought of it back then. If there are melodic minor examples (ie producing a lydian dominant V7), that's more interesting.
Also everyone knows Miles started the modal thing in jazz? Apparently not.
Indeed. And yet still they play the dorian and melodic minor sounds. Probably because they were playing melodies not scales, but they were playing them over m6 sounds, and these m6 melodies incorporate both leading and flat sevenths. So I call it a 'minor 6th scale' - a scale the incorporates both the dorian and mm scales. But you have to talk the language people understand a little bit...OK. I'd say that was just one way of looking at it - depends on your perspective. If the diatonic scale is being used, there's no sense in giving it modal names on each chord - if only because, pre-1959, nobody had any idea about modes.
I mean it gets a bit much when you say, here is Django playing D dorian #11 on D in minor swing (i.e. what I think of as brain dead CST BS) - clearly he's playing in the key of A minor and using the harmonic minor sounds, and outlining the chords, but also using the prevailing diatonic key for passing tones. Happens a lot, right? So diatonic playing of scales. Anyway that's not what I'm talking about.
Again, do you not think, 'play D minor 6 stuff on G7' is not a relatively straightforward way of putting it?If notes are altered from the diatonic scale, I'd relate that to the chord: chromatic embellishment or voice-leading. I wouldn't feel it necessary to identify a scale, although I have no problem with those who do. I prefer the "horizontal" (linear) view to the vertical chord-scale one. (I realise they are not mutually exclusive.)
Or simply spelling chord tones? It obviously depends on what stack of 3rds we're talking about. Those examples I gave from Anthropology definitely seem to indicate a concept of superimposing one chord on another, to create dissonance (alterations, not extensions) - which, if you add in the (original) chord tones, is going to imply some kind of scale.
Yes, I see the argument here. If players really did think that playing a V7 from the 5th was a kind of "minor" (ii over V), then that would lead logically to a lydian dominant scale on the tritone sub - which is the altered V scale - because the dominant note needs to be retained. I.e., the normal Ab minor scale (or Ab dorian) won't work on a G7. You need both F and G, making melodic minor.
The altered scale also works harmonically, as a stack of thirds. TBF I see little of this in bop. But, Abm triads on G7? Sure.I still prefer to see that pitch collection as the total of available notes: chord tones and alterations (in either the V7 or bII7), created to provide chromatic voice-leading on to the tonic. It's probably just me, but I don't find the melodic minor connection offers me anything I don't already know just from looking at the chords. I know when I first learned about the altered scale, it made little sense to me until I realised how it worked melodically (voice-leading). Once you see that, you don't need the chord-scale concept, IMO. You can see the purpose of altered chord tones (or the tritone sub), and that's all you need.
Those phrases in Anthropology could be interpreted as that (Ebm6 arp on a D7 - important minor of the tritone sub, yes?).
Yes, for example, check out the penultimate phrase of the first half Little Wille Leaps. There's a thing in Dm - quite a scalar line which finishes up on a C# on the chord G7.Can you give examples of that (recordings or transcriptions)?
I don't. I think 'minor' with all the common variations as required melodically.I still don't see what purpose calling it "melodic minor harmony" serves, however. It's just a label which tells us nothing of any practical use (tells me nothing anyhow).
On dominants, you need m6
On minors, and minor ii-V-I's you can use any of them. m6 is a common colour.
Much easier. But it has the same effect.
Well, we play melodies as well as harmony you know. There's grey area between, but I moved to a scalar thing because I got tired of harmony all the time. But harmony comes out of scales too. You just have to miss out every other note.I do understand the process you're outlining of beginning with a "ii over V" idea, and then converting both to the tritone sub. I guess I'm looking at it from the other end of the telescope. I'm not so much interested in how they got there (unless there really are quotes from the old jazz masters on the subject), I find I see all I need from looking back from now - i.e., reading chord symbols or transcriptions, listening to the actual playing. The ruling concept for me is voice-leading.
OTOH - voice-leading is also melodic, so *shrugs*. I suspect the key difference is between chromatic melody and diatonic melody.
But then the third is the both a tremendously harmonic and melodic interval (according to Charles McPherson) and thirds are where scales and harmony meet. You can get a long way just playing scales in 3rds, which you can call - chords and arpeggios.
It's the duck and rabbit. But scales come in for me because you need them to play diatonic passing tones which are a feature of the music.
If you think - major triad has a typical upper neighbours above the 5 and 1, and a semitone above 1, you are actually getting pretty close to a scale anyway, whatever you call it. The concepts are interlinked.
I like scales ATM because they get me away from thinking about the harmony so much. but that doesn't mean I'm not playing stuff you would hear as harmony.
So yes other end of the telescope, really.
Charlie Parker plays plenty of scales. Transcribing him got me pointed this way. The main scale he plays (to my knowledge) is harmonic minor.Ah ha!
Interesting, thanks. Charlie Parker (supposedly) did say "Learn all your scales, then forget em all and just play". There's definitely evidence of scalar thinking in his solos, along with the arps and chromatics.
But there's a difference between scales going up and down and CST. Anyway, I think if something was used in general music before 1945, why the hell wouldn't it be used? No-one asks if Mozart uses scales. In fact most of his melodic patterns are in use in jazz, of course. People have been using scales for thousands of years.
The question is not 'were scales used?' they were, since the early days (Eddie Lang on Sweet Sue, for instance, G scale in thirds. Check it) but whether or not they had a concept of things like melodic minor modes, which they didn't. But they still played the sound, which comes from the leading note of the V minor on I dominant.
What I mean is Lydian Dominant doesn't have an 'avoid note'. Mixolydian/Dominant scale does (4). Of course, no one gave a crap about this back in 1945.Really? I always thought it was altered on V and lydian dominant on bII. I realise there are exceptions, but surely it's more common that way? (Rest all agreed.)
In terms of actual music, Lyd Dom on V is pretty frickin' common. Of course - I think of it as... guess... Minor on dominant. Here's an example - oh I can't be bothered. Just go check out some bebop heads. The tetrachord #4 5 6 b7 (7 1 2 b3 from POV of the important minor) is EVERYWHERE.
I don't give a crap what's in any theory books. That's what's on the records.
Anyway, that's a minor key melodic fragment, no? So what do you think the guys in the bop era were thinking - dominant raised 4 or minor key on dominant?
I think minor is easier than dominant #whatever in this case. But who knows?
See Joe Henderson, Gary Burton, Julian Lage, Ben Monder, Kurt, Holdsworth etc....Not quite sure what that might mean.
This forum helps fill in a lot of blanks for me. Just have to know where to look ;-)You're now touching on my ignorance...
Scales are super melodic, just don't go up and down in steps all the time.I think this comes down to personal taste in the end. I still think melody and rhythm, based on chord tones and chromatics (have done for 50 years, pretty much!). I don't really like to hear improvisation which sounds scalar.
I'll check it out, thanks.
Video will be forthcoming when I get a chance. I can only say - give scalic thinking a chance. It's a different perspective, and might help you come up with some fresh ideas. No theory of improv is complete in itself. It's stupid to think that way because one closes oneself off.
Right, that's it. I'm done :-)Last edited by christianm77; 12-14-2016 at 05:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
Shipping Catastrophe
Today, 07:27 AM in Everything Else