-
One inbetween way would be to play the sub dominant, but include the 5 as part of the Imaj6/dim scale. By practicing your dominant functions as diminished chords now (rather than -6), you’ll have multiple options that grow out of the diminished that you can apply easily later
-
03-13-2018 11:42 AM
-
I'm definitely finding it easier to play the dominant chords as dim7. So if I've got a II-V maybe just hit the II, then the V as a VIIdim (I know... not Barry-approved lingo).
Originally Posted by joe2758
But I also see some value in learning the dominant chords as -6 as well. Just for the sake of flexibility as anything else.
Yes, that's the way I need to do it as well. I think way too slowly* to be trying to do it while playing.personally, i used the theory to find moves i like and then made them habits.
*(Semi-off-topic: When I was a kid, I had trouble doing arithmetic as quickly as my classmates. After some testing, it was discovered that I have a learning disability called "coding dysfunction". Basically, that means that I'm slow at translating between symbol systems. So while I can think quite quickly on a verbal level, if I have have to translate, say, letters to abstract symbols, it's going to take me a lot longer than it would take the average person.)
-
[QUOTE=Boston Joe;855255]I'm definitely finding it easier to play the dominant chords as dim7. So if I've got a II-V maybe just hit the II, then the V as a VIIdim (I know... not Barry-approved lingo).
But I also see some value in learning the dominant chords as -6 as well. Just for the sake of flexibility as anything else.
QUOTE]
Definitely do both. In my opinion using the dim as your dominant function is not only easier, but I find it to be more flexible that the -6 options.
At this point in my study I see diminished chords as "place holders" for a multitude of other options based around it.
you have 4 dominant chords and two dominant b5 chords with borrowing options for all 6! One step at a time though
-
Yeah I think the dim thing is really important.
-
It makes sense, and I'm sure will make more sense once I've got all of the basic stuff down and start working on borrowing. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
@Boston Joe, I hesitate to wade in here as I am a relative newbie. I also know that I hold a view about this that is not accepted by most of the BH students on this site, so take what I say with a grain of salt....
I think you are missing out on one very rich aspect of what AK/BH are laying down if you approach this as some kind of cool alternate substitutions scheme. I would resist going through the chart and just "translating" into BH. Take to heart that BH says music isn't "2-5's", but rather "movement". Also note that Chapter is titled "Movement", not "Substitutions".
Looking at the first 14 bars of "Alone Together", I would interpret it like this:
For the first 6 bars, it really isn't doing anything harmonically but sitting on the D-. It is your job to give six bars of D- some life, whether arranging for solo guitar or comping. You are not bound by whoever wrote that chart (and I'm guessing not the composer, but even if he did). You can totally reharmonize, of course, but even if you keep to the basic already laid down there is no reason you have to slavishly follow the ii-V in every other bar. That is just that arranger's way to give motion.
The most basic way to give it "movement" is to use the D-6/dim scale. You can play around with pushing the D-6 chords for 5 full measures and it will probably sound way more hip that 80% of the comping you've heard. Especially working with AK's partial fingerings. Drop3 on the sixth string where you only play three notes is great with no bass player. Middle two notes out of the Drop3 or Drop2 if you do.
AK also shows you how you can create movement similar to the ii-V by using a walking inner voices from the IV6 to the I6. These examples are gold. However, he didn't do any for a minor sound or incorporating a 7b5. I wish he had, and secretly hope for a Vol.2 that explicitly deals with minor tonality. That makes it harder to apply to this tune. I would almost suggest starting with something where the tonic sound is clearly major just so you can get some time with these under your fingers. Still, by using your ears you can come up with your own moves.
Next four bars are all about the G-. Bar 9 doesn't seem to be about G-, but the melody note is the 6th of the G and a pickup note at the 5th. Again, I think the arranger added some interesting movement in that bar but you can create your own movement or none. The last four bars are "siblings" F6/D6. I believe you can treat it as just D. Nothing in bar 11's melody that would contradict D or require an Fmaj sound.
So for me, the BH way of looking at this would be to see a tune that goes from D- to G- to D. I'm not talking key centers, just what the harmonic movement is. It is my job to keep movement in those spaces and to come up with good transitions. I don't try to translate into BH the movement that some previous arranger put down on the chart.
I'm not a pro, and I don't teach. I'm just some schmo who spends way too much time with his guitar. But I hope my slightly different perspective turns out to be useful for you. Apologies to the BH illuminati.
-
Hi Rhett - Originally Posted by rlrhett
This is just step one. I'm doing this in order to get the relationships straight in my head, and under my fingers, and obviously from the fact that I needed three attempts to do it, it's something I need to work on.
The more subtle uses I think need to come later. Right now, I'm kind of bogged down in my F9 = C-6 = A-7b5 stuff. Like I said upthread, managing those relationships are not an easy thing for me. I've tended to learn everything as relating to the root of the chord. For example: While I can easily see XX7888 as both C-6 and F9, XX5545 is NOT something that looks like either of those to me. That looks only like A-7b5 to me. So associating those names with that shape is going to take a little while.
But your point is well taken, and I'm really doing my best to break out of the chord-to-chord mentality.
-
Your opinion is as valid as anyone's, but I don't agree with the advice. What you describe I can't imagine is even 10% of the book. I think Boston Joe is on the right track. But maybe that makes me BH illuminati Originally Posted by rlrhett
-
I’ve noticed that the sounds made by all these various alternatives are often very similar anyway. For example if you translate the first couple of bars into the various equivalents of Dm, Em7b5 and A7 alt, it doesn’t sound much different to just using Dm6/dim. The related dim chord (e.g. Dbdim = Edim = Gdim etc) is only one note different from Em7b5, and it also gives you the A7b9. Or if you treat that A7 as being Bbm6, that’s still only one note different from the related dim chord (Dbdim etc). Like Rhett and Christian have said, if you want to, you can often simplify the movement down to one 6/dim scale for a few bars and it won’t sound much different.
I think all these approaches are worth exploring, it’s all good.
-
Well, there's always the standard jazz answer: Do both. Originally Posted by joe2758
Your opinion is as valid as anyone's, but I don't agree with the advice. What you describe I can't imagine is even 10% of the book. I think Boston Joe is on the right track. But maybe that makes me BH illuminati
-
Well I think that is a good answer actually! (just saw joe’s post!). Originally Posted by Boston Joe
I think that’s the beauty of this system. Joe is right that there are a lot more options there if you wish to explore them. But I think Rhett has a point too, that you can simplify it and still get good results. I sort of do it both ways I guess.
-
Yes, of course do both! When I said that is a small % of the total, I didn't mean throw it out and focus on the other stuff. I just meant there's no sense in limiting yourself to it. Yeah, that stuff is all good
-
I agree with everything you say. Originally Posted by rlrhett
I’ve not gone as far as some into the BH harmonic method, but this is what i use on gigs all the time, and people give me money to do it so it can’t sound that bad.
But I am quite stupid. Maybe others have better software so they can cope with two scales a bar. I shall keep doing it my way because I have trouble remembering my own name at the moment.
-
FWIW, I'm not sure I consider what I'm talking about "simplifying". I think of it as coming from a different starting point. Rather than see harmony as a chain of chords, I think of it as having a harmonic "home" and creating movement by moving voices. I've never been to a BH seminar (I can't travel, and live as far from NYC as you can in the ConUS.) But working through the BH DVD's and AK's book that is what I hear them teaching.
ONE way of creating movement in a -6 is by moving every voice at the same time diatonically... the -6/dim scale. It is the easiest and a good place to start. But that is only one example of movement. AK demonstrates movement by moving two voices stepwise. Another movement that I believe came from @grahambop or @WILSON 1 is to move three voices down a step, then two voices down a step then everybody back up diatonically to resolve back to -6. Analyzed that would be D-6 -> E7b5 -> Dbdim -> D-6.
Is that simpler? Maybe. But I think of it as movement around D-6. As @Boston Joe said, you can take either approach or both. I just wanted him to be aware that if you just look at it as a system of substitutions you may miss out on something that would really open up his comping. It sure was an "aha" moment for me.
-
Wow! Fantastic!
Music is being played.
Movement is created.
My book is an interpretation of Barry's teaching.
Barry's harmonic teaching is an interpretation of the Classical/American Songbook tradition.
You folks are interpreting too and it's all valid!
Let's not be rigid.
As far as we know Barry is lurking on this thread stealing stuff.
-
Thanks Alan!
PS: We're ready for Vol. 2!!!!
-
Alan, thanks again for the help, both here and in email. I'm very excited to get the book.
-
I tried a little of Rhett's approach this morning and I like it. But I also like having the option of going to the other scales on II-V bars. Rhett's approach has the advantage of less thinking, which I like.
The one thing about treating the first six bars as all D- is that you don't really hear the E-7b6 (G-6) chords, so I think it sounds good to hit those, and then back to D-.
The D- stuff for six bars sounds a little klunky to me (so did playing every chord), but I haven't gotten into borrowing notes yet, and I suspect that will de-klunk much of it.
-
Yes, I think that borrowing is the key here. I found that borrowing on the alto voice, and moving around using the major six scale gives you a lot of really cool voicings that include minor 11’s for the ii chord, and all kinds of weird and interesting altered sounds on the V. Originally Posted by Boston Joe
-
Two questions about this: Originally Posted by wzpgsr
1. When you borrow on one particular voice, do you always borrow in the same direction (I mean, in a playing situation, I'm sure you'd be more flexible, but for practicing purposes)? IOW, do you always borrow from the chord higher, or lower, or do you switch between higher and lower? I was finding some of the shapes very difficult to finger.
2. I think the answer to this is yes, but I want to confirm: as you work through the scale, you borrow notes when you're on the diminished chords too, yes?
---------
I had an interesting time experimenting with "alternative" dominant chords. I.e., just dropping one of the notes on the dim7. I'm going to try the same with raising a note (which should, IINM, give you four different 9th/m7b5/m6 chords.)
-
In principle, I think the answer to both your questions is yes (i.e. borrow consistently from the same direction, and do it on all the chords).
But in actual playing, I just tend to experiment with borrowing from either direction and maybe only on some of the chords.
As you say, some options are hard to finger so I probably don't use those much.
Really I think just do whatever generates the sounds you like most.
-
One thing to remember about borrowing is that BH says in his DVD's that the "borrowed" note is used in passing. He doesn't like to sit on the borrowed note, but rather resolve it before moving to the next chord.* That doesn't mean that is how you have to do it, and I've seen some player here post examples where they sit on the borrowed note and move to the next chord.
To answer your questions, I doubt there any hard and fast rules. BH also says on the DVD that you can borrow a diminished note for the 6 chord OR a 6 note for the diminished. On some grips I find borrowing both above and below gives a good three note run. Not to beat a dead horse, but I think again the boss is "movement". You are borrowing to give a sense of movement to otherwise static chords. If you listen to BH play, or Oscar Peterson et. al., you rarely get a sense of a static chord. That left hand seems to always be moving. I think that is the sound that BH is trying to teach. Again, of course you can use the system to create a sense of "out" harmony in a series of static held chords.
*Disk 3@28:40
-
Originally Posted by grahambop
Right. Thanks. I know that in playing situations, anything goes. I'm just trying to get the basic skills together, so I want to be consistent with what I do. I don't want to half-ass this.
-
When I was learning it I looked at it chord by chord and chord-tone by chord-tone above and below. Then I looked at the ease of playing it and roll with that. After doing that for a while I just sort of unconsciously memorized the easy ones( i.e. possible), so I don't think about what the borrowed notes actually are unless I'm trying to discover new ones for an arrangement or something
-
to clarify, though, are you talking about going through a harmonized scale keeping the same voice borrowed and resolving at the end, or resolving each borrowed note right away?
Reply With Quote
Julian Lage Trio, Amsterdam, April 17 2024
Today, 02:19 AM in The Players