-
Thanks, Wilson1! Nice BH inspired turnaround. You helped me see that the turnarounds that Kingstone demonstrates using the 6 chords works as well for the min6, giving us that dominant feel for a blues. I swear what I'm learning from you guys in this study group is going to radically change the way I play.
Here is my take minus borrowed notes (PS sorry about all the string noise. I am either going to have to go back to nylon strings or try some flatwounds):
-
05-21-2017 02:03 AM
-
I'm so happy to see people getting good stuff from the book. You inspired me to pick up my old box for a minute.
I hope you can use this.
(I – I7)
I6 Drop 3 – Fm6 – D in bass (Minor 6th on fifth of Bb7)
(IV - #Ivo – I)
Eb6 – Eb6 Eo Bb6 – Well what is this? Is it just a quick treatment of the given chords? Is it a move on E Diminished, 2 consecutive notes below = Eb6, 2 consecutive notes above = Bb6? I remember Barry saying “yessss” When I played it rhythmically correctly at Howard Rees apartment in about 2004 and that was good enough for me.
Major Monk Move or Four To Five (not in book – similar to Major Monk Move)
(Vm7 – I7)
6th On 5th of Important Minor to Important Minor with connecting diminished. (Eb6 – Ebo – Ab6)
Tritones Minor (Bm6) with Borrowed Notes From Above in Bass & Soprano – Resolve.
(IV7)
Important Minor of IV7 (Bbm6)
Related Diminished of IV7 (Bbo)
(I7)
Slide 3rds of Io to I7
(VI7) or (IIIm7b5 - VI7)
Vm6 of Key over it’s 6th (Fm6 / D in bass) – Borrow Diminished Soprano from Above/Below and resolve.
Same move minor third up on Tritones Minor of VI7 (Abm6) – Borrow Diminished Soprano from Above/Below and resolve.
That’s Sisters And Brothers! (Minor Thirds)
(IIm7)
Eb6 over C – Drop 3
Eb6o Scale Drop Two No Tenor (I love these as I’m lazy)
3rd in bass down to 6th in bass.
(V7)
Minor 6th On 5th (Cm6) Of Dominant (F7)with 2 Borrowed Notes. This is the example Wilson1 was asking about. (Page 52-53)
(I)
A stunning resolution to the one.
PS. This is a Study Group and in no way should anyone defer to me. I just happened to meet Howard and Barry in 86, take to the method, keep good notes and be in the lucky position to publish with Barry's good wishes. I wish to step away and watch what you have to add to Barry's great teaching. Thanks for all your kind words and support.
AlanLast edited by A. Kingstone; 05-25-2017 at 11:50 PM.
-
This is going to be a blunt comment and I hope I don't offend anyone, especially as I haven't contributed anything to the thread - please don't take this the wrong way ok
I'm very interested in the Barry Harris approach, however I'm not wholly sold on most guitar applications of it I've heard so far, with many using diminished chords in ways that I find too obvious and "blocky", and the hyper virtuosic, unaccessible (to me) application of a Pasquale Grasso. Just a while ago I was watching Rori Ben Hur explain it in a YT clip; it's very clear, and easy to do if you know your "6" chord forms. But does it sound all that great? He was interjecting those very obvious Dim chords in between his "6" shapes, devoting equal time to the diminished shapes, and it just didn't sound very natural to me. But granted, the tutorial may have been beginner level.
By contrast, on piano I've heard it applied in some exceedingly beautiful and subtle playing by Barry Harris himself. One of the best "beginner" level explanation I've heard is the following; diminished notes are framed as passing, or borrowed notes and executed as such in a seamless sound "tapestry" - the difference between a natural and a contrived sounding result ?
Last edited by m_d; 05-26-2017 at 08:38 AM.
-
Just listen to any chord solo by Wes Montgomery.
Originally Posted by m_d
This is going to be a blunt comment and I hope I don't offend anyone, especially as I haven't contributed anything to the thread - please don't take this the wrong way ok
I'm very interested in the Barry Harris approach, however I'm not wholly sold on most guitar applications of it I've heard so far, with many using diminished chords in ways that I find too obvious and "blocky", and the hyper virtuosic, unaccessible (to me) application of a Pasquale Grasso. Just a while ago I was watching Rori Ben Hur explain it in a YT clip; it's very clear, and easy to do if you know your "6" chord forms. But does it sound all that great? He was interjecting those very obvious Dim chords in between his "6" shapes, devoting equal time to the diminished shapes, and it just didn't sound very natural to me. But granted, the tutorial may have been beginner level.
By contrast, on piano I've heard it applied in some exceedingly beautiful and subtle playing by Barry Harris himself. One of the best "beginner" level explanation I've heard is the following; diminished notes are framed as passing, or borrowed notes and executed as such in a seamless sound "tapestry" - the difference between a natural and a contrived sounding result ?
-
Also I would point out that you don't have to do the Barry Harris thing the whole time, in between every chord. You can just use it when you want a bit more harmonic movement or to spice things up a bit.
Not trying to 'blow my own trumpet', but as an example here is the clip I did recently for the practical standards thread. There are several places in this where I used 6th/dim moves either to outline the melody or to add some movement in the chords. I don't think it sounds too obvious?
-
Incidentally, by my reckoning there are 26 diminished chords in this clip! Originally Posted by grahambop
-
Both the playing, and how the diminished concepts were weaved in, were excellent. Thank you! Originally Posted by grahambop
-
Thanks! I want do more solo stuff like this, I enjoy the challenges it presents! Originally Posted by m_d
-
I thought I'd post after wrestling my iPhone ( who knew about storage? ), iMovie ( who knew Sierra would install right in the middle of everything? ) and a cold ( that I knew was on its way).
Anyway, I'm very excited to see Mr. Kingstone a part of this study; nothing like having the author standing by for questions!
Sorry about my voice.
P.S. I just reviewed the vid and I mistakenly said "borrowed the tenor voice" which should be the ALTO voice.
I'll watch that in the future.Last edited by WILSON 1; 05-30-2017 at 10:20 PM.
-
I kind of know what you mean. Originally Posted by m_d
This is going to be a blunt comment and I hope I don't offend anyone, especially as I haven't contributed anything to the thread - please don't take this the wrong way ok
I'm very interested in the Barry Harris approach, however I'm not wholly sold on most guitar applications of it I've heard so far, with many using diminished chords in ways that I find too obvious and "blocky", and the hyper virtuosic, unaccessible (to me) application of a Pasquale Grasso. Just a while ago I was watching Rori Ben Hur explain it in a YT clip; it's very clear, and easy to do if you know your "6" chord forms. But does it sound all that great? He was interjecting those very obvious Dim chords in between his "6" shapes, devoting equal time to the diminished shapes, and it just didn't sound very natural to me. But granted, the tutorial may have been beginner level.
By contrast, on piano I've heard it applied in some exceedingly beautiful and subtle playing by Barry Harris himself. One of the best "beginner" level explanation I've heard is the following; diminished notes are framed as passing, or borrowed notes and executed as such in a seamless sound "tapestry" - the difference between a natural and a contrived sounding result ?
I prefer drop 3 voicings on the guitar on the whole. I think Peter Bersntein said something about drop 2 voicings on the middle strings sound a bit crap on guitar (I paraphrase) and I kind of agree.
Drop 2 Barry Harris stuff on the top string group I use all the time for comping and chord soloing.
In any case for me it's all about the borrowed note chords, other-wise its just parallel block motion which I find a bit boring on guitar if only because it's such a Wes thing and everyone's done it death. (I like it when pianists do it, but they can do it better.)Last edited by christianm77; 05-31-2017 at 08:07 AM.
-
I know, Wes' playing is so passe these days! Just out of interest, what is parallel block motion please, not that I would ever want to sound like Wes or anything, but just to satisfy my curiosity Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Originally Posted by A. Kingstone
Thanks Alan, the blues is the form I am most familiar with and your little example has helped me see the possibilities. I liked the way it sounds. I'm afraid I don't have your book, but do have chordability by Roni Ben hur, which presents this very methodically but perhaps not very musically. It reminds me of the count basie type ending used backwards and forwards and messed about with a bit. Is that fair?
-
That is fair. Bar two is the Basie ending. (Inverted)
Don't ignore the Drop 2 Middle Four Strings.
-
No disparaging of Wes here, and I will fight he who disparages only my favourite jazz guitarist of all time (probably) with guns or swords according to special rules in a book. Originally Posted by plasticpigeon
I know, Wes' playing is so passe these days! Just out of interest, what is parallel block motion please, not that I would ever want to sound like Wes or anything, but just to satisfy my curiosity
It's more that the things Wes did have become cliches a bit because he really made them his own so definitively. If I do the Wes stuff, octaves, tremolo with the thumb, block chord soloing etc, it sounds like I'm putting it on. And everyone goes - cool, Wes stuff!!
(The things that I find really interesting about Wes's playing are the things that are very hard to copy, but there hangs another tale.)
Anyway parallel block chord motion.
Parallel - everything moving in similar motion
Block chord - use of dim7 and chord inversions to harmonise melody
BH's theory encapsulates this trad. stuff, but allows for all sorts of other motion.
-
Thanks, I was being facetious about Wes of course! How else would one harmonise a melody other than with chord inversions?
-
There's a specific formula for trad. block chord harmonisation. Wes appears to use this, as do many pianists of the era. Originally Posted by plasticpigeon
Block chord - Wikipedia
There are other formulas for harmonising melodies in jazz.
-
Originally Posted by plasticpigeon
This:
But, as simple as he makes it sound, I couldn't pull it off for a second. I took the course he is referring to, and still couldn't do it. I just am not used to moving those middle voices around AT THE SAME TIME as a walking bass AT THE SAME TIME as the melody in the top voice(s). I'm sure I could make my fingers do it with concentrated effort, but I don't find the Joe Pass/Wes Montgomery style of solo playing quite so boring yet. I think I'll take a stab at sounding at least passably competent with block chords first.
-
I've been traveling for a while and away from both the forum and my guitar. I come back to all of this!
How awesome that Alan K. posted. It will be my dessert when I'm done catching up with work to have a look at that. Also, cool stuff Wilson1. I like the quartal harmony stuff you have going with those substitutions. I admit I've been playing it quite a bit more straight. But I like your vibe. Of course, grahambop's Startdust is exactly what I am hoping to get to when I'm all grown up and playing this stuff for real!
-
I am in the process of reviewing the work up to now before I dive into Chapter 3, but something has been nagging at me. I don't feel I fully grasp the function and use of the min6dim scale.
The maj6dim scale is the whole harmonic package --if maybe a bit limited. The maj6 chord is ambiguously maj or min depending on context. It can be the IVmaj6 or the ii, for eg. The dominant chords are covered by their related dim chords. You really can harmonize an entire piece with just the maj6dim scale.
I know most people see the maj6dim scale as a way of extending and embellishing the fake book chords. But I like to see it as a tool for a complete re-harmonization of the melody from the ground up. I have been deliberately NOT looking at the chord charts and starting from only the melody, and the maj6dim scale seems to be there for me. All the traditional cadences and progressions can be seen through the prism of the maj6dim scale.
The min6dim scale, on the other hand, I don't understand well. It basically seems to be only used as a substitution for a dominant sound. It doesn't seem to be a complete system. The bII-6 chords appear as a replacement for the related dim chord of the dominant. But then, what about the dim chords of the bII-6? They don't sound right at all as a replacement for the dominant chord. The min6 on the V of the V (or the I-6) is a sweet sounding substitution for the V7, but again its related dim sounds jarring to my ear.
Likewise, what happens when I move off of the dominant chord? Is the min6dim limited to just being a substitution for the dominant to be dropped when the cadence is resolved, or can it be used to harmonize a whole progression like its cousin the maj6dim? What if you were harmonizing a melody with a minor key/tonality? Can the min6dim be used beyond being a dom substitute there?
In short, can the min6dim be used like the maj6dim to harmonize entire passages or is it really best thought of as an embellishment/substitution for a dominant chord?
-
Ha ha, I know of Martin Taylor, he is brilliant, but for me I like the sound of the block chord approach. Maybe if I ever get competent at that I will want to explore other possibilities. Little steps. Originally Posted by rlrhett
-
I'm not sure that I completely understand what you are looking for. The maj6/dim scale can in theory be used to reharmonize a melody because it contains the tonic as well as the dominant elements of a key center. It is effectively a series of V-Is. So there is always a resolution to the tonic. Originally Posted by rlrhett
But the m6/dim, when used as a dominant does not contain a tonic sound. Those scales are effectively a bunch of V/Vs-V. Eg in C the V7 is G7 so use Dm6/dim or Abm6/dim for altered sounds. With the Dm6, you can think of the related dim as effectively a A7b9, so you get A7b9-Dm6-A7b9-Dm6 - V-I-V-I etc. Or with Abm6 the related dim is Eb7b9 - so again V-I-V-I etc.
But the "I" is the dominant sound in these examples not the tonic so you don't get any real resolution.
So, when you are using the m6/dim scale as a dominant, I don't think it makes much sense to try and see it as a system unto itself (this is the part that I guess I'm not understanding in your question - if you don't want to see the dim scales as substitutes for the fake book chords, then why does it matter that "They don't sound right at all as a replacement for the dominant chord"?)The related dims of the m6/dim scales are not trying to replace the dominant chord - they are creating movement within the dominant sound. Just like the related dims in maj6/dim scales are not trying to replace the tonic but are creating movement within the tonic sound or maybe more accurately away from and back to the tonic sound.
With respect to harmonizing minor keys, I don't know why not. The related dim of Dm6 for example is A7b9 which would be the V chord in D minor.
-
Yeah, exactly. For instance. Rhythm Changes
Bb6 Gm7 | Cm7 F7 | Dm7 G7 | Cm7 F7 |
Bb6 Bb7 | Eb Ebm6 | Dm7 G7 | Cm7 F7 |
OK - so this progression is all Bb maj6-dim with the exception of G7. What do we do there? Well you could ignore it of course, but you could also just pop in the Cm6 - dim for a couple of bars... So
Bb6-dim | % | Cm6-dim |
Bb6 dim | % | Cm6-dim |
Now the motion you create with these scales is up to you. How you manage borrowed notes etc.
Bb6 Gm7 | Cm7 F7
Fewer borrowed notes --> more
Dm7 G7 | Cm7 F7
More borrowed notes --> fewer
The bridge?
D7-dim | % | G7-dim | % |
C7-dim | % | F7-dim | % |
I'll try to post up some examples in audio form.
-
That's why the book (i.e. the 'Harmonic method') has both maj6 and min6 scales in it - you need to use them both, depending on the context.
You can't do everything with just one of them.
-
ColinO, for not understanding my question, you sure went a long way to answering it!
I agree that the dim of the maj6dim scale isn't a tonic substitute. It creates movement and is therefore a substitute in my ears for the dominant. The min6 seemed like a less unstable version of the dim, i.e. still creating movement. Still a substitute for the dominant.
However the min6's dim sounds simply dissonant to me, and I can't find a sense of resolution in the min6dim scale. That is why it matters even if I am reharmonizing and not following a fake book.
Can we build tension and resolve it within the min6dim? Is there a cadence to be had?
Obviously I understand there are no absolutes in music, and our ears evolve. We can be trained to find a resolution in almost anything. I guess I was looking for suggestions and examples of the min6dim used to harmonize an entire section of a piece so that it could understand it better.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I specialise in answers that don't really answer. Originally Posted by rlrhett
Maybe the issue is that when using min6 as a dominant sound, you are resolving to a tension so to speak. If you end a cadence on a G7, which is essentially what you are doing when you use Dm6/dim for the G7, it doesn't really sound "resolved". It may be sort of similar to backcycling using 7ths - eg E7 - A7 - D7 - G7. It's not really going to sound right until you end up on a Cmaj7 or something.
I'm not at my guitar but maybe try a Em7b5 - A7b9 - Dm6. That's just a minor 2-5-1 and the A7b9 is the related dim to the Dm6.
I'm going to try what you are saying when I get home and see if I can better see what you are getting at.
Reply With Quote
Playing live and getting the best sound from the...
Yesterday, 02:08 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos