Following the soloist

[rpjazzguitar]

I have read that players with big ears can instantly hear the harmony being outlined by the soloist, even when it's far from the vanilla harmony of the tune. And, from some things I've read, they adjust their comping accordingly.

But I don't quite get how that works. So, if the vanilla chord is D7 and you can identify that the soloist played an Ab7 arp what are you supposed to do? If you play Ab7, you take away the tension the soloist probably wants. In fact, if you play anything other than D7, you may be stepping on what the soloist is trying to do. Same principle can apply to alterations beyond the tritone. Just because you know what it is, doesn't mean you should play it.

Say the soloist takes the harmony up a half step for a bar or two. Suppose you know that the soloist wants you to do that too. But you've already started playing that bar in the original key. So, maybe you just have to live with the result. But, next chorus, what do you do? You have no guarantee that the soloist is going to alter the harmony in the same way every chorus.

And, that's the crux of a problem. Even if you're capable of identifying what the soloist is doing, you can't predict what the soloist will do on the next chorus.

And, if you wait to hear it before you play a chord, what happens to your role in propelling the groove?

Seems to me that you ought to be able to react to the loudness of the solo and to the phrasing. If the soloist is playing busy, or not, you do the opposite, for example. But, the advice about following the soloist, which I've read more than once ... I don't get exactly how that's supposed to work.

And, I didn't mention the situation where there is also a pianist.

[pamosmusic]

I don’t know. I couldn’t give less of a crap.

Responding to dynamics and phrasing is way more important. Not to mention that, by definition, if you’re reacting to the fact that a person is playing a tritone sub, then you’re already behind them.

I would just add to the list that responding to the level of dissonance and intensity is important, but specifically matching that dissonance is not something I find particularly interesting.

What I would say is that hearing what the soloist is doing can give you a lot of information about how they’re coming at certain progressions or parts of the tune and can inform what you do later. But that seem different than what you’re suggesting

[AllanAllen]

I have read that players with big ears can instantly hear the harmony being outlined by the soloist, even when it's far from the vanilla harmony of the tune. And, from some things I've read, they adjust their comping accordingly

I have also read similar, but I haven’t ever been provided with a concrete example of a soloist going out there and the comping following. For example Coltrane’s But Not For Me was arranged, not hear and catch up.

What I really believe could happen is someone soloing goes from Gershwin changes to Coltrane and the backing picks it up and goes along. Which, I think, is what these people are talking about.

[djg]

I have also read similar, but I haven’t ever been provided with a concrete example of a soloist going out there and the comping following. For example Coltrane’s But Not For Me was arranged, not hear and catch up.

i can think of many examples. very obvious: in the A sections of rhythm changes there are alternate changes starting on F#7 and going through the cycle. as soon as the soloist is doing that, the rhythm section may be expected to follow these alternate changes.

another example: for I IV III VI II V we often play #IVm7b5 IVmin III bIIIdim II V etc. the same movement as in night and day applied to pennies from heaven or cant give you anything but love. once the soloist does that (playing F#m7b5 over Cmaj7) you are again supposed to be able and follow. same can happen in i thought about you or girl from ipanema.

[rpjazzguitar]

i can think of many examples. very obvious: in the A sections of rhythm changes there are alternate changes starting on F#7 and going through the cycle. as soon as the soloist is doing that, the rhythm section may be expected to follow these alternate changes.

another example: for I IV III VI II V we often play #IVm7b5 IVmin III bIIIdim II V etc. the same movement as in night and day applied to pennies from heaven or cant give you anything but love. once the soloist does that (playing F#m7b5 over Cmaj7) you are again supposed to be able and follow. same can happen in i thought about you or girl from ipanema.

In a situation where you hear a chord and can figure out - before you've played the vanilla chord - what sequence is about to unfold (and you're right), if you go with the soloist's apparent changes, you make all his notes consonant. But, maybe the soloist would prefer the dissonance?

And, in the Night and Day example, on the bandstand you have probably already played the Imaj7 when you hear the #IVm7b5 (in C, F# A C E). At that moment, only the F# is the clue (or are you expecting complete arps starting on the roots?) and it might, or might not, mean that the soloist is going with that alternative chord sequence.

And what about the bass? The bassist is probably going to play the root (C) before the soloist suggests the alternative chord sequence with an F# in his line. If the bassist plays C and the soloist outlines F#m7b5 (F# A C E) the band is going to sound like C6#11 (notation would be more likely F#m7b5/C). If I heard that, I wouldn't automatically go to the alternative chord sequence, maybe a better player would. In reality, I might realize what's going on when I heard the Ab in the IVm or the diminished chord on the bIII. Or, I might not.

Upon reflection, if there's one player who can push the band toward the alternative chord sequence, it's the bassist. If he plays the F# instead of the C, then the F, everybody has a chance to hear the chromaticism and follow it. But, he'd be suggesting that before the soloist has weighed in.

The next chord change in the bass relates to the IV, either major or minor6, next chord is the III and is the same either way, so is the next note bIII or VI?

[AllanAllen]

i can think of many examples. very obvious: in the A sections of rhythm changes there are alternate changes starting on F#7 and going through the cycle. as soon as the soloist is doing that, the rhythm section may be expected to follow these alternate changes.

another example: for I IV III VI II V we often play #IVm7b5 IVmin III bIIIdim II V etc. the same movement as in night and day applied to pennies from heaven or cant give you anything but love. once the soloist does that (playing F#m7b5 over Cmaj7) you are again supposed to be able and follow. same can happen in i thought about you or girl from ipanema.

Odd of you to cut out the part of my comment that says exactly this. A rhythm section hearing common alternate chords/changes isn’t really the same as following a soloist making new harmony.

One is vocabulary, the other is, I suspect, overblown expectations of the first.

Sure, maybe Pasquale Grasso and Borelli can do it. But let’s stay in the mortal realm of possibilities.

Also, I IV III VI is a turn around to ii, especially in that context. Any turnaround that lands on ii will work. Further complicating things. Well, only if you’re concerned about playing it “correctly”.

[rpjazzguitar]

What I'm wondering about is whether the advice about following the soloist's harmony actually makes sense.

For that F#m7b5 sequence to work, the bassist needs to play the F#, but he can't wait to find out whether the soloist is going to do that. If he plays the F#, the soloist has to follow him. If he plays a C, the soloist is going to have trouble convincing anybody that the F#m7b5 sequence is really going to happen. That would apply to other situations where there's a common set of alternate changes -- the bassist is often going to end up in control, not the soloist.

For the tritone sub in the solo, the soloist wants to hear the juxtaposition. If you play the tritone with him, you make him sound boring.

If you figure out the exact alternate harmony in chorus 1, does that mean the soloist is going to do the same thing in subsequent choruses?

[AllanAllen]

Also, is it really an F#m7b5 or is it just a spicy rootless C6?

It’s as much of a sub as Em7b5 is over C7.

[pamosmusic]

1. You hear the way a soloist takes the turnaround to a blues and use that information to better accompany them on the next chorus.

2. You hear the soloist play a sharp 11 on their dominant chord and you add it too.

1 is very common and any good accompanist is doing this constantly, whether or not “better accompany” means to imitate.

2 is really not that interesting and is the sort of thing you hear college kids do to prove that they earned that B+ in aural skills. Sometimes you want to do that, I guess, but it’s more of an impact effect you might use once in a tune or not. The same goes for rhythm I imitation.

I once heard someone describe some particularly gaudy decor as “a poor man’s idea of what a rich man likes.” And that’s kind of how I think of that sort of performative imitation. It’s the sort of thing less experienced players do because they imagine it’s what more experienced players do.

There is a third thing which is that you play with someone else so often that you can just kind of vibe out where they’re going and just land things simultaneous and stuff. That definitely involves the first thing but is also a little bit of another situation, obviously.

[Christian Miller]

Sometimes it’s hard not to join in

Don’t judge me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pamosmusic]

Sometimes it’s hard not to join in

Don’t judge me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

oooooooo look who got a B+ in aural skills ooooooo

[Christian Miller]

Also, is it really an F#m7b5 or is it just a spicy rootless C6?

It’s as much of a sub as Em7b5 is over C7.

Dunno - what bass doing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

oooooooo look who got a B+ in aural skills ooooooo

B+? I wish


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Strat-itis]

Generally the assumption when the soloist makes chord alterations is that it should sound good against the standard harmony in the form.. So it doesn't mean you're lacking if you just stick to the form. It would mean he's lacking if he's pulling subs that sound bad against the band. The bonus is if you can hear them accurately and enrich the ensemble's tonality and interplay.

[AllanAllen]

Dunno - what bass doing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nobody can tell, the sound guy is only running him through the subs.

[Strat-itis]

[rpjazzguitar]

1. You hear the way a soloist takes the turnaround to a blues and use that information to better accompany them on the next chorus.

2. You hear the soloist play a sharp 11 on their dominant chord and you add it too.

1 is very common and any good accompanist is doing this constantly, whether or not “better accompany” means to imitate.

I make a point of varying the turnarounds in blues, both in solos and in comping. If the soloist is doing something different every time, how do you use the information for the next chorus?

Similar issue with the #11. If you hear it in the solo, you can play it. But, the soloist might not return to it, instead playing a 4th or 5th. Seems to me that, if you hear the #11, you might reasonly decide to leave the fifths, raised, lowered or perfect, out of your chord. Same with 9ths. That moves you in the direction of playing shells, which may not be a good destination.

I'm really not sure how to respond in a manner that can be generalized..

What I've been doing (with my very mortal ears) is staying close to the original harmony and keeping out of the way by playing sparsely when the solo is busy. If I hear the soloist go up a half step in a place that gets done, I'm likely to hear it as a sideslip and stay with the original key. Otherwise, I might make his outside line sound boring. But, if I hear it in the piano or bass, I'm going to go with them.

I think there are answers/techniques that can be applied, but I also think that the standard advice about listening to the harmony in the solo and responding accordingly is not specific enough to be useful.

[pamosmusic]

I make a point of varying the turnarounds in blues, both in solos and in comping. If the soloist is doing something different every time, how do you use the information for the next chorus?

Is the soloist building tension from one chorus to the next? If so, that’s probably where it’s happening. How are they doing it? Can you help?

Do they play pretty out turnarounds or stay pretty in?

Similar issue with the #11. If you hear it in the solo, you can play it. But, the soloist might not return to it, instead playing a 4th or 5th. Seems to me that, if you hear the #11, you might reasonly decide to leave the fifths, raised, lowered or perfect, out of your chord. Same with 9ths. That moves you in the direction of playing shells, which may not be a good destination.

To be blunt — who gives a sh**?

I honestly have never met anyone who cares. I have never played with someone who has said “man you missed the ninth I played on the IV chord of Billie’s Bounce.” I have absolutely met people who have gotten a little annoyed when someone refuses to match their level of intensity. I have been the target of that annoyance and I have been the one who is annoyed. It’s very very very frustrating to try to solo with an accompanist who is so wrapped up in this stuff that they can’t just play with you.

(also shells are always a good destination)

I'm really not sure how to respond in a manner that can be generalized..

Well … yeah … but you did ask the question.

I think there are answers/techniques that can be applied, but I also think that the standard advice about listening to the harmony in the solo and responding accordingly is not specific enough to be useful.

I think that it would depend on whether or not someone has tools to employ in responding to the soloist.

I think if someone were asking me advice and were really wrapped up in this stuff, my sincere advice would be that it’s a red herring. Focus on rhythm. If the voicings are simple but you’re playing a solid groove, filling in some empty spaces, confident when the soloist drives somewhere with the time, then everyone will be happy.

[pamosmusic]

Caveat:

are you accompanying a singer?

in which case — yes, mind your extensions.

[Christian Miller]

Yeah my simplest response to Rick is that this isn't really how jazz works, don't worry about it too much.

A least, not for song based "changes" playing. (Modal stuff can be a bit different.)

In the music you'll hear countless examples where there's some momentary 'clash' because the soloist and the rhythm section are taking different views of the chord progression. We can think of these as passing chords that resolve.

And then there's the tradition within jazz of playing more melodically over the song. Lester Young, Art Pepper and to an extent Miles Davis all do this. It's sort of like modal improvisation, except instead of matching a chord scale over every chord they are simplifying the changes to a series of key areas. Works very well if you can play. The clashes are neither here nor there, and you wouldn't notice them if you weren't transcribing. Chet Bakers solo on Let's Get Lost is a case in point. Get a load of this:


Interestingly I have no trouble singing the E and G natural against the Ebo7 chord. It just sounds good. The accompanist certainly should not have avoided the Eb dim chord.

Chet, needless to say, sounds better than an inferior player playing all the 'correct' harmony choices they learned in a book. Jazz has got more that way, perhaps, but even players as chord-scale rooted as Kurt Rosenwinkel get up to shenanigens - I caught him playing a major 7th on a dominant the other day. That's how jazz has always been.

For a practical example, the changes on Chet's version of Let's Get Lost are quite different from those in iReal. If we are on a gig and you call the song having learned it from Chet's version and someone is comping from the iReal changes, you inevitably get some harmonic differences. I see this as a feature of jazz, not a bug. I don't see it as an important consideration to match everything the soloist plays.

That said, we do need to develop our ears, obviously, hearing what's going on is a good thing to work towards.

IMO you don't want to be thinking from the root of every chord. Instead listen out for what the soloist is outlining. It's Em7 on Cmaj7, not Cmaj9. It's a tritone sub, not an altered dominant, etc. And that goes for the 'clashy' passing chords. As for how you hear what's going on, I acquired these skills (to the extent I have them) through learning songs and solos by ear. So it's not a big deal if you've done your homework, you learn what the common chord moves sound like. That's been more helpful to me than any amount of ear training exercises.

And so if I do hear it then the question becomes - do I join in - or do I allow the chords to play off each other? If not, it’s fine to keep it simple.

[rpjazzguitar]

I appreciate the discussion.

For me, it comes down to evaluating the advice to "recognize the harmony in the solo and comp accordingly" or words to that effect. Is it just BS?

When I try to particularize this advice, I get nowhere useful. But, I don't have big ears. Makes me wonder how those with huge ears might respond to this advice.

I agree that tracking rhythm and intensity are basic. The amount of space being left in the solo also matters. Then, there's a question about how much to lead the soloist with your own harmonic ideas. When it comes to how to track the harmony of the solo, suddenly there are so many situations and considerations that general statements are difficult.

[pamosmusic]

I appreciate the discussion.

For me, it comes down to evaluating the advice to "recognize the harmony in the solo and comp accordingly" or words to that effect. Is it just BS?

Well this isn’t really what you were asking up top. Your examples all related to mining the specific harmonies being outlined in the solo. Seems like the consensus is that this isn’t practical or even really desirable much of the time.

As for what it means to recognize what’s being played and comp accordingly, I feel like there have already been numerous examples of what that might look like.

If the soloist treats one sort of progression a certain way, try to catch it the next time. If they’re building tension, build with them. I’m not really sure what else you’re looking for.

If you want more specific q answers, you might need to ask a more specific question at this point.

I agree that tracking rhythm and intensity are basic.

I don’t think anyone said this. Doing this well is high art. Not sure why it would be basic.

The amount of space being left in the solo also matters.

Sure.

Then, there's a question about how much to lead the soloist with your own harmonic ideas.

Sparingly.

When it comes to how to track the harmony of the solo, suddenly there are so many situations and considerations that general statements are difficult.

Sure, but then … we’re here, no?

[Alter]

You can hear stuff that you have already practiced usually. So say a soloist is approaching most II V Is playing inside or outside you can comp accordingly. Is he playing altered, diminished, whole tone, multi tonics, etc over them? Does he play other chords rather than the original ones? A jazz blues is a nice example of this as it can be played many ways, and it 's nice for the chords to be able to follow and support the soloist.

The ultimate musical situation of this is free jazz, the good kind that is. Many times players explore noise or effects or whatever, but for me the most interesting free jazz is the kind that say Garzone and The Fringe used to play, where one makes up jazz harmonies, forms and rhythms on the spot and the others can hear it and play over it just like that. Or the way Brad Mehldau constantly suggests new harmonies and the band plays on it. Or the way the Miles Davis band with Tony Williams and Herbie Hancock would improvise harmonically over standards always making them something completely different.

Mick Goodrick was like that, we used to do that in his lessons. Whatever you would play for him, he could always figure out instantly what it was, great ears, he could hear any scale, arpeggio or chord progression. And he wasn't even into jazz tradition..!

[rpjazzguitar]

You can hear stuff that you have already practiced usually. So say a soloist is approaching most II V Is playing inside or outside you can comp accordingly. Is he playing altered, diminished, whole tone, multi tonics, etc over them? Does he play other chords rather than the original ones? A jazz blues is a nice example of this as it can be played many ways, and it 's nice for the chords to be able to follow and support the soloist.

The ultimate musical situation of this is free jazz, the good kind that is. Many times players explore noise or effects or whatever, but for me the most interesting free jazz is the kind that say Garzone and The Fringe used to play, where one makes up jazz harmonies, forms and rhythms on the spot and the others can hear it and play over it just like that. Or the way Brad Mehldau constantly suggests new harmonies and the band plays on it. Or the way the Miles Davis band with Tony Williams and Herbie Hancock would improvise harmonically over standards always making them something completely different.

Mick Goodrick was like that, we used to do that in his lessons. Whatever you would play for him, he could always figure out instantly what it was, great ears, he could hear any scale, arpeggio or chord progression. And he wasn't even into jazz tradition..!

Thanks for this.

Anything further to say about how Mick used all that awareness while he comped behind a soloist?

[rpjazzguitar]

[QUOTE=pamosmusic;1456979]Well this isn’t really what you were asking up top. Your examples all related to mining the specific harmonies being outlined in the solo. Seems like the consensus is that this isn’t practical or even really desirable much of the time.

I've been trying to evaluate that general advice. That is, how to react if you recognize the harmony in the solo.

If the soloist treats one sort of progression a certain way, try to catch it the next time.

Does that mean that, say, if the soloist plays a tritone arp then next chorus you play the tritone chord? I think that's usually a mistake. If it doesn't mean that, what does it mean?

If you want more specific q answers, you might need to ask a more specific question at this point.

Agreed. This is a bottom-up kind of issue, Here's something to do in this specific situation -- one situation at a time.

I appreciate the discussion. It's always bothered me that this advice seems like BS.