Staying Diatonic... or not?

[garybaldy]

Hi
Having played bass in a jazz context on and off (mostly on) for just about 50 years I've tended to stay diatonic with my note choice on a non diatonic chord (apart from the chord tones).
Now, in my latter years I'm dabbling in guitar chord melody.
As an example, with All of Me in Cmaj I would, over the E7, perhaps incorporate a Bm7b5 where appropriate etc.
Also eg. There Will Never Be Another You in Ebmaj, 2nd chord is written Dm7b5 and 3rd G7. So clearly with the Dm7b5 it stays diatonic and if altering the G7 I would choose an Eb note as opposed to Enat.
I've been looking at a transcription of a Joe Pass version where he uses a full bar of Dm7 and then a G13.
It still works even though it's leading to a Cm9. JP seems to do this kind of thing a lot .
So, there are no rules.
What's everyone's take on this.
Am I over thinking this?

[Jimmy blue note]

Diatonic is a guideline based on the diatonicism the composer heard and felt. Cole Porter, writing for musical theatre had a great ear and it fit the words of the 1940's sensibilities.
Any piece is a form for you to compose your own solo on, and that certainly includes your choice of chords. If you can hear it, and you can play it, it'll be convincing. If it's convincing, it's exciting and it's good.
If you think it's a good idea but you haven't worked it out to convince yourself (through practice), it'll come across as contrived, or at the very least academic. That's not so good.
It's OK to think it out, and it's a given must-do to practice it so your time is strong and your ideas are personal. That's not overthinking at all, it's your style.

Have a good reason to take it out. It'll be a new language, or at least another accent or dialect. Embrace it with honesty and it's a personal statement. A lot of it depends on who you listen to. If you listen to Joe Pass, you're not going to have the same guidelines and aural variety as someone like Jonathan Kreisberg or on the far end Ben Monder. But they can all play convincingly on the standards, it's just where their ears take them that makes them sound different.

[fep]

If it sounds good, it is good.

Also on bass, I use a lot of chromatic connectors, chromatic approach tones, especially when walking. Those are great for guitar solos also.

[garybaldy]

If it sounds good, it is good.

Also on bass, I use a lot of chromatic connectors, chromatic approach tones, especially when walking. Those are great for guitar solos also.

Yes. On bass I would use non diatonic notes in a chromatic line but if I was playing over say G7 to Cm, and not using chromatics, I would play, for instance, notes G F Eb D C rather than use an Enat note.

[bako]

To my ears, the G13 is a clear C major statement but that doesn't mean we can't get to Cm. C major itself can progress to C minor.
What I don't hear is E of G13 moving to Eb directly. F is fine, G, D, etc.

[Tal_175]

Hi
Having played bass in a jazz context on and off (mostly on) for just about 50 years I've tended to stay diatonic with my note choice on a non diatonic chord (apart from the chord tones).
Now, in my latter years I'm dabbling in guitar chord melody.
As an example, with All of Me in Cmaj I would, over the E7, perhaps incorporate a Bm7b5 where appropriate etc.
Also eg. There Will Never Be Another You in Ebmaj, 2nd chord is written Dm7b5 and 3rd G7. So clearly with the Dm7b5 it stays diatonic and if altering the G7 I would choose an Eb note as opposed to Enat.
I've been looking at a transcription of a Joe Pass version where he uses a full bar of Dm7 and then a G13.
It still works even though it's leading to a Cm9. JP seems to do this kind of thing a lot .
So, there are no rules.
What's everyone's take on this.
Am I over thinking this?

I created a thread on this topic a while ago. The examples you give are all secondary dominants, so I'm assuming your question is specifically about what alterations to use on secondary dominants.
I put the link below. Don't worry about how I named the approaches, they are just names I came up with just to name the categories. For example staying diatonic would correspond to what I called the "Classical approach" in that thread (though it's not meant to claim that it's how it always is in the classical music):
Secondary dominant extensions / available notes

[A. Kingstone]

You can alter notes on a dominant any time it resolves around the cycle.

Think of the Tritone's Minor as altered notes.

G7 = Dominant
Db7 = Tritone
Abm6 = Tritone's Minor

[Tal_175]

Actually dominant lines do not always come from one scale. It's not uncommon that lines over dominants imply a mixture of scales.
For example a line can descend the vanilla mixolydian scale but end with b9, #9 before resolving or go up a diminished 7 arpeggio, come down mixolydian with half steps. (despite the diminished arp. implying diminished or, phrygian dominant scale etc).

Each scale comes with a set of small, common line building ideas. These ideas can be mixed.

[pauln]

Actually dominant lines do not always come from one scale. It's not uncommon that lines over dominants imply a mixture of scales.
For example a line can descend the vanilla mixolydian scale but end with b9, #9 before resolving or go up a diminished 7 arpeggio, come down mixolydian with half steps. (despite the diminished arp. implying diminished or, phrygian dominant scale etc).

Each scale comes with a set of small, common line building ideas. These ideas can be mixed.

Exactly; moving mixed scale sources... and what is really meant by staying diatonic? Remaining within one scale through changes?

If not, what is the difference between staying diatonic (with reference to changing tonics matching roots of changing chords or staying diatonic with respect to whole and half steps but not placing the half steps to match those of major and minor scales) and not staying diatonic?

[Tal_175]

Exactly; moving mixed scale sources... and what is really meant by staying diatonic? Remaining within one scale through changes?

If not, what is the difference between staying diatonic (with reference to changing tonics matching roots of changing chords or staying diatonic with respect to whole and half steps but not placing the half steps to match those of major and minor scales) and not staying diatonic?

I think what he means is, say over VI7 going to ii min, what type of dominant do you play over VI7? In the key of C, that's A7. Do you play b6 (F) or the non diatonic 6 (F#), do you play 9th (B) or the non diatonic b9 (Bb)?

In other words, the only necessary implied alteration is C# in A7. But do you keep the rest of the scale diatonic or do you alter the other notes? There are different approaches (this is also discussed in the thread I linked).

But going even further, what I meant in my previous post was, you can have both the diatonic and non-diatonic notes even within the same line played a dominant chord. But I think it's still useful to mentally organize these choices as coming from separate source scales.

[vsaumarez]

The temptation to turn a V chord into a II V works in many situations, but I'm not sure it works so well over the melody in All of Me for the 3rd and 4th measure. The G# is telling me E7. If you add Bm7b5 in front of it, you're in a minor key and it doesn't give the tune that same lift. I'm not saying it's wrong, it just a case of what your ear tells you sounds better, or more authentic. If you place a Bm7 in front you need to omit the 5th. However, in the 5th to 8th measures a minor II V I sounds fine eg | | Em7b5/// | A7/// | Dm7/// |. Playing chord melody allows you stretch the boundaries more so you are looking at many different ways to extend harmonies especially over static measures. An E7alt, or minor ii V is fair game. Just be aware of the next measures, eg from E7alt to A7, or Em7b5.

[christianm77]

Hi
Having played bass in a jazz context on and off (mostly on) for just about 50 years I've tended to stay diatonic with my note choice on a non diatonic chord (apart from the chord tones).
Now, in my latter years I'm dabbling in guitar chord melody.
As an example, with All of Me in Cmaj I would, over the E7, perhaps incorporate a Bm7b5 where appropriate etc.
Also eg. There Will Never Be Another You in Ebmaj, 2nd chord is written Dm7b5 and 3rd G7. So clearly with the Dm7b5 it stays diatonic and if altering the G7 I would choose an Eb note as opposed to Enat.
I've been looking at a transcription of a Joe Pass version where he uses a full bar of Dm7 and then a G13.
It still works even though it's leading to a Cm9. JP seems to do this kind of thing a lot .
So, there are no rules.
What's everyone's take on this.
Am I over thinking this?

It’s all in the voice leading for me

I really like the sound of a V13 going to Im. It’s old school actually, Charlie Christian used to do this.

Obviously going Dm7b5 G13 Cm gives F E Eb in the voice leading

As long as you end up on the target chord and get there via some sort of clear voice leading everything else is up for grabs

[bako]

A funny thing about a few secondary dominants (Ex. D7,E7,A7 in C major)
is that you can either acknowledge the introduction of the new note
(F#,G#,C#) or stay with the original diatonic note (F,G,C) which is heard as a #9 on the dominant. Or, you can play both in the same melodic line.

[WILSON 1]

Hi

What's everyone's take on this.
Am I over thinking this?

Is x3445x Cmaj7b5 ?

Not if you play D in Take the A Train.