The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Posts 76 to 100 of 135
  1. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    ....

    You want melodic "cells", then internalize the Barry Harris 5432 phrases (and extrapolate the 876 phrases while your at it) , mix and blend them all with 7th chord arpeggios ... also internalize the three essential Bill Evans phrases (cells) , and the classic Oscar Peterson blues break and you are pretty well melodic-ized.
    I think I can find the BH phrases, but care to share the Bill Evans phrases as well as the OP lick? I'd be interested in hearing those, and I agree with what has been said about how sharing ideas showing actual usage of note groups is way more useful than discussing scales!

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #77

    User Info Menu

    Like I said, learning all the basic scales is super important to being a great improviser.

    I don't think anyone can argue that Wes or Raney didn't know their basic majors and minors.

    But in the jazz guitar community we (this is something I can find ample proof here, on Youtube, and everywhere else) are obsessed with scales.

    So much so that many of us (not all) forget that we need to play music, not scales.

    Please don't tell me I'm generalizing, I really don't feel like spamming JGF with the thousands upon thousands of scale talk we guitarists do on the internet and else wise... I don't, because I like you guys and gals and that would ruin the forum--but don't push me to prove the obvious.

    Instead, let's turn a page--take a break from rote scale talk--and start posting our own examples. Let's show the rest of the jazz guitar world how it's meant to be done.

    Yes, other instrumentalists engage in this scale obsessiveness. But--sometimes (I'm stressing the sometimes) I feel like all we talk about is scales.

    That's an honest evaluation. Not an effort to troll--I know some of us love name calling over here--that's unfortunate. I think we get deeper and dig beneath the surface to find out what's really important: application, vocabulary, cells, melodic development (we've had a couple of those threads fizzle out, why?) harmonic movement--inner movement, big band arrangements applied to the guitar, really looking at Ed Bickert's comping, or Jim Hall's (Jeffy B got us started)...

    all that.

    That's my story and I'm sticking to it

  4. #78

    User Info Menu

    On the tune Blue Bossa I never much liked playing an E melodically on that D-7 b5... but I like it harmonically and when I am block chording over the D-7b5 (6 dim scale system)

  5. #79
    People mostly talk scales when someone asks a question or starts a thread about them. I just don't see many statements about how melody, listening, transcribing etc AREN'T important. I don't think anyone is saying those things, but it always seems implied.

  6. #80

    User Info Menu

    Maybe some are obsessed with thinking others are obsessed with scales?

    If you are around intermediate players, then scales will be talked about, they are like the ABCs as Joe Henderson said to me.

  7. #81

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    Maybe some are obsessed with thinking others are obsessed with scales?

    If you are around intermediate players, then scales will be talked about, they are like the ABCs as Joe Henderson said to me.
    I think it's much harder to talk about melody and rhythmic feel than it is to talk about scales.

    So people talk about the part of things that can be expressed in writing. There just seems to be more than can be written about regarding scales.

    I go back and forth. Sometimes I think that maybe I don't pay enough attention to scales, but other times I think the opposite.

    I think it depends on what you want to sound like and where you are in relation to your goal.

    I think that more scale knowledge is probably like the eighth thing I should work on.

  8. #82

    User Info Menu

    We should have a sticky thread in this forum that lists commonly shared insights so they don't get repeated in every thread:
    1- Tone is in the hands. Yes, player is a big part of the sound. When people talk gear they know that.
    2- Speed isn't everything. Yes, people who talk technique and want to get faster often know that.
    3- Use your ears. Yes, people who have a question about theory often understand the importance of ears. But some knowledge of theory allows your conscious mind to train your ears.
    4- Just playing scales isn't improvisation. Yes, trying to get better at using scales is just a step in development as a jazz musician.
    5- It's all in the records. Actually, this is an exception, this one should be stated in every thread.
    Feel free to add to the list.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 07-14-2019 at 08:56 PM.

  9. #83

    User Info Menu

    Scales are not synonymous with CST.

    Scales are the raw materials of melody. They are necessary for almost all music.

    CST is something quite distinct from that.

    The problem as I see it is not that many guitarists are obsessed with scales, but they are obsessed with harmonic relationships to the nth degree on every chord.

    Blue Bossa offers a clear example. Where does that #9 come from?

    The melody is a simple natural minor one for the first 8 bars. No accidentals at all until the modulation to Db. It’s very scalar. And yet with its deft combination of steps, leaps and sequences, it’s clearly a strong, well written one.

    Over the G7 chord we have a held Bb resolving to an Ab. So this is where our harmonic interpretation would see this as #9 which is what we might dutifully record in the chord symbols.

    However - what does it actually mean? In classical terms it’s a false relation, the Bb against the B in the chord. This particular one - the use of a b3 against a dom7 chord is perhaps the most common in jazz.

    OTOH - how about this? I think Dorham wrote a strong melody in Cm, and rather than mapping it out over every chord, wrote some changes to tune that sounded good to him. Dorham harmonised a melody.

    Chord symbols freeze that sometimes casual relationship between melody and chords and freezes it in time. CST, explodes that relationship into further scales. In this case we might use the G altered scale. We melodicise the harmony.

    But where is the G altered scale in the original melody?

    When I talk about mixed mode usage I mean that it’s entirely too possible for students to get locked into playing, say, Dm7b5 G7b9 Cm. Expressing the changes in that kind of way - compromises melodic invention in a sense. A good melody takes advantages of the natural tensions present in the scale - for instance the tendency of b6 and 7 to create tension, and so on.

    If you find yourself locked into the changes too much, either playing endless bop lines, or CST ideas, it can be really useful to take a step back and hear and think melodically… And simple scales are certainly a part of this.
    Last edited by christianm77; 07-14-2019 at 03:19 PM.

  10. #84

    User Info Menu

    Can I add an extra point?

    6 - There's absolutely nothing wrong with playing stepwise scales. Every jazz musician does it, and they do it a lot.

  11. #85

    User Info Menu

    7 - just make sure it's not the only thing you do - and that you LINK that sucker to the next chord.

  12. #86

    User Info Menu

    The problem isn't the scale talk.

    It's that the talk ends at scale talk--as the end all be all.

    An obsession over the scale instead of HOW to use the scale.

    Not "what degree do I start on" stuff... that's still scale talk.

    I mean talk like "here's where I lean in to create tension" or "this melodic fragment is a great place to start learning the altered sound #9, b9, R"

    Or... instead of going all Ab MM on a G7alt chord, why not directly relate it to the final destination--the Cminor?

    I blame Berklee. I just spoke to a former Berklee prof, and we had a conversation about all this...

  13. #87

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    The problem isn't the scale talk.

    It's that the talk ends at scale talk--as the end all be all.

    An obsession over the scale instead of HOW to use the scale.

    Not "what degree do I start on" stuff... that's still scale talk.
    Yes, as if playing 500 scales will make you play jazz.

    How about this? Focus for about a year on one scale. Say, the mixolydian. Learn how to apply it everywhere.

    Break it up into triads, arpeggios, thirds. Add in LNTs, UNTs, enclosures, run it with added notes, octave displacements etc. Learn how to connect to a target chords and resolve.

    Congratulations, you have learned how to bebop.

    Now you can learn the minor.

    It's amazing how easy it is to go from pattern to language, if you have a road map.

    Having strong rhythmic ideas helps too, of course. Luckily you can steal them. That's probably the single biggest thing to listen out for when transcribing. Rhythm is the language. Rhythm constrains and governs pitch choice much more than you would think from the books out there.

    Another problem with modern CST pedagogy and improvisation styles is it decouples the two things either consciously or by accident. You can do this sort of thing well of course - but you have to learn bop FIRST.

    Lines should have swing in built. You know how it's impossible not to swing a Wes line, for instance?

    I mean talk like "here's where I lean in to create tension" or "this melodic fragment is a great place to start learning the altered sound #9, b9, R"

    Or... instead of going all Ab MM on a G7alt chord, why not directly relate it to the final destination--the Cminor?
    Yeah you nicked that off me.

    I blame Berklee. I just spoke to a former Berklee prof, and we had a conversation about all this...
    Oh yeah? What did he say in his defence? :-)

  14. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    The problem isn't the scale talk.

    It's that the talk ends at scale talk--as the end all be all.

    An obsession over the scale instead of HOW to use the scale.
    Okay, but seriously, who's doing that ? I've just never seen anybody oppose that conversation. We're having it now in a couple of different threads and yet... talking about it like it doesn't exist or something?

  15. #89

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    I think it's much harder to talk about melody and rhythmic feel than it is to talk about scales.

    So people talk about the part of things that can be expressed in writing. There just seems to be more than can be written about regarding scales.

    I go back and forth. Sometimes I think that maybe I don't pay enough attention to scales, but other times I think the opposite.

    I think it depends on what you want to sound like and where you are in relation to your goal.

    I think that more scale knowledge is probably like the eighth thing I should work on.
    Well you seem happy to talk about feel and rhythm which is refreshing and I always feel you have something to say.

    I don’t think it’s harder necessarily. I think a lot of people just aren’t very interested in it.

    We should prob go hang out on some drum forums. Second an honest to god drummer shows up here and starts talking rhythm some people are ‘stop intellectualising it.’ It’s risible.

  16. #90

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    Okay, but seriously, who's doing that ? I've just never seen anybody oppose that conversation. We're having it now in a couple of different threads and yet... talking about it like it doesn't exist or something?
    Matt, I respect and appreciate our conversations.

    Do you really want all the examples? I was talking about on the internet in general.

    Would it help the conversation?

    I don't wanna drive away people I respect by spamming a thread with examples of things I don't even find helpful.

    You know what I mean?

  17. #91

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Well you seem happy to talk about feel and rhythm which is refreshing and I always feel you have something to say.

    I don’t think it’s harder necessarily. I think a lot of people just aren’t very interested in it.

    We should prob go hang out on some drum forums. Second an honest to god drummer shows up here and starts talking rhythm some people are ‘stop intellectualising it.’ It’s risible.
    I would, actually, REALLY like that.

    Who was the guy who talked to us about Brazilian Ketu (?) rhythms? Where did he go? He was VERY interesting.

    I'd rather hear him talk about rhythm than reading the same theory and scale conversations over and over again. I'd rather hear the great guitar players on the forum actually play, and hear how other instrumentalists talk about music.

  18. #92

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    I would, actually, REALLY like that.

    Who was the guy who talked to us about Brazilian Ketu (?) rhythms? Where did he go? He was VERY interesting.

    I'd rather hear him talk about rhythm than reading the same theory and scale conversations over and over again. I'd rather hear the great guitar players on the forum actually play, and hear how other instrumentalists talk about music.
    Yes he was wasn’t he? I think if you ask questions direct re: the Ketu stuff he responds. It’s obvious it’s something important to him.

  19. #93

    User Info Menu

    Btw have you seen this interview?

    Interview with Billy Hart | DO THE M@TH

  20. #94

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    The problem isn't the scale talk.

    It's that the talk ends at scale talk--as the end all be all.

    An obsession over the scale instead of HOW to use the scale.

    Not "what degree do I start on" stuff... that's still scale talk.

    I mean talk like "here's where I lean in to create tension" or "this melodic fragment is a great place to start learning the altered sound #9, b9, R"

    Or... instead of going all Ab MM on a G7alt chord, why not directly relate it to the final destination--the Cminor?

    I blame Berklee. I just spoke to a former Berklee prof, and we had a conversation about all this...
    I'm not really sure what we're talking about, but I've played Blue Bossa a few times <g>.

    The way I hear that chord is, on guitar, 3x3446. That's R b7 3 b13 b9.

    So, that might suggest (not that I'd think this way in any playing situation) a G7b9b13 scale. Chord tones are G B Eb F and Bb.

    Notes that need to be handled with care could include F# D E and A. That avoids the nat7 on a dominant, the neighbors of the Eb and the natural 9 when you have a #9.

    That leaves Ab, C, Db. If you add in those three you get Galt, but it seems to me that it doesn't have to be that. It could be any scale that includes the chord tones (and probably some that don't).

    When I follow this logic past the road sign that says "No Outlet", I end up thinking that the theory isn't very helpful. Instead, I figure I've got chord tones, tones that are easily consonant and tones that I have to be careful with. So, I've got 7 notes, give or take, that are easy and another handful I'm going to pick by ear.

    This, as I understand from Joe Pass' interviews, is pretty much the way he did it.

    There are guitarists who talk about theoretical considerations in an arcane way and who sound great. But, when I listen to them, I don't hear the theory. Rather, I usually hear great time feel and a lot of jazz vocabulary. There are also players who wax eloquent about theory and I can hear them applying it -- I usually dislike this approach.

  21. #95

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77

    Having strong rhythmic ideas helps too, of course. Luckily you can steal them. That's probably the single biggest thing to listen out for when transcribing. Rhythm is the language. Rhythm constrains and governs pitch choice much more than you would think from the books out there.

    Another problem with modern CST pedagogy and improvisation styles is it decouples the two things either consciously or by accident. You can do this sort of thing well of course - but you have to learn bop FIRST.

    Lines should have swing in built. You know how it's impossible not to swing a Wes line, for instance?
    Yes, you said it before. I think I am actually ranting about CST, to be honest.

    Your observation about rhythm and note choice is absent in MOST "pedagogy" about jazz guitar. That's a real shame.

    The conversation I had with the Berklee prof ended like this (paraphrased) "there's two pieces to the pie. You got the basic tools of music. Most colleges teach that. Heck, a guy in India can learn about the lydian domiant from the internet and be abreast with the folks here in the states. Then you got the foundational, big picture piece. This is all about making the music. This is stuff like learning flow, phrasing, and breathing--it's harder to teach, but it's crucial to being a great improviser"

    Some of you might know who I talked to just by that snippet. Do me a huge favor, don't name the person on this public forum. Thanks

  22. #96

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    Yes, you said it before. I think I am actually ranting about CST, to be honest.

    Your observation about rhythm and note choice is absent in MOST "pedagogy" about jazz guitar. That's a real shame.

    The conversation I had with the Berklee prof ended like this (paraphrased) "there's two pieces to the pie. You got the basic tools of music. Most colleges teach that. Heck, a guy in India can learn about the lydian domiant from the internet and be abreast with the folks here in the states. Then you got the foundational, big picture piece. This is all about making the music. This is stuff like learning flow, phrasing, and breathing--it's harder to teach, but it's crucial to being a great improviser"

    Some of you might know who I talked to just by that snippet. Do me a huge favor, don't name the person on this public forum. Thanks
    Well I doubt anyone would seriously think studying the Berklee syllabus was the same as going to Berklee. Right?

    Anyway read that interview if you want to know what Wes taught Billy Hart about playing the drums.

    Rereading it now I realise it’s just been lodged in my brain for 5 years. (5 years!!!) one of the best I’ve read.

  23. #97

    User Info Menu

    I read a snippet, but my in laws are here... so...

    What do you mean "my shit ain't laying"?

  24. #98

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Btw have you seen this interview?

    Interview with Billy Hart | DO THE M@TH

    that's one heck of an interview!! the great billy hart

    always like to see the tony williams praise!!..

    & liked this guitar realted line-

    "Guitarist Eddie McFadden told me: you can get it from other guys–or you can get from the source (by studying music from books, and learning it yourself). The thing was to get your own sound. If not your own style, at least your own sound."

    cheers
    Last edited by neatomic; 07-14-2019 at 09:59 PM.

  25. #99

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Well you seem happy to talk about feel and rhythm which is refreshing and I always feel you have something to say.

    I don’t think it’s harder necessarily. I think a lot of people just aren’t very interested in it.

    We should prob go hang out on some drum forums. Second an honest to god drummer shows up here and starts talking rhythm some people are ‘stop intellectualising it.’ It’s risible.
    I have the tune Favela (aka O Morro) in my book and I've played it many times.

    Last night, I heard a Brazilian band with similar instrumentation (they had an extra guitar and two extra percussionists, but drums/bass/piano/guitar/reed was the same) play the same tune, among others. You could hear them from the street. People came in until the place was packed with people standing and dancing. The energy was great, the time feel was terrific and, really, not much else mattered. There were solos, and some of them were actually very good. One of the guitarists sounded like he'd had a background in shred guitar and was applying it to Brazilian tunes through changes in a way I hadn't heard before. Pianist played advanced harmony. But, the reed player was pretty basic and the nylon guitar player wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary, but it didn't seem like anything was wrong during their solos.

    My groups play a perfectly acceptable version of Favela, but we don't achieve that high energy state. We play next tonight and I'm going to try to work on it.

    I came away thinking that jazz education should have two phases. Phase I you build great time feel on a couple of chord vamp.

    If you're able to do that well enough that your audience will only stop dancing when they pass out, then you get to begin phase 2 which is about advanced harmony and soloing.

  26. #100

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    The problem isn't the scale talk.

    It's that the talk ends at scale talk--as the end all be all.

    An obsession over the scale instead of HOW to use the scale.

    Not "what degree do I start on" stuff... that's still scale talk.

    I mean talk like "here's where I lean in to create tension" or "this melodic fragment is a great place to start learning the altered sound #9, b9, R"

    Or... instead of going all Ab MM on a G7alt chord, why not directly relate it to the final destination--the Cminor?

    I blame Berklee. I just spoke to a former Berklee prof, and we had a conversation about all this...
    I think there's an element of confirmation bias in what you're saying. I mean, yes, there are plenty of people on the internet talking about scales, but there are also plenty of people not talking about scales. I think eventually most people who stick with jazz for long enough get some sort of system down for knowing what what notes to play and how to reharmonize, and have moved on to other topics, but there's a always a fresh crop of scale-folk to keep that conversation going (and Christian ...). I don't think the world of jazz is scale obsessed. I think certain corners of the internet are, and you just have to pull what ever value you can out of scale discussions, and keep perspective.

    I am a moderately not terrible player, but I happen to hang out and jam with some very, very good players (including some who went to Berklee, NEC, etc). They mostly don't talk about scales. They talk about tunes, dynamics, the shape of a solo, phrasing, feel, time, etc. I do know a some who do, but that stems from having an intellectual/analytic cast of mind, and they don't talk about it to the exclusion of other elements of musicianship.

    John