-
Curious if anyone is familiar with and has thoughts on Ralph Patt's "Vanilla Book" (Index).
As I'm learning songs, I like to look at the changes from a variety of sources to figure out what's going on. Patt's changes sometimes seem to match the early recordings of Great Songbook tunes, but I wonder to what extent anyone actually uses these kinds of harmonic devices anymore.
Share your thoughts if you're familiar with the source and use it.
-
04-13-2013 12:49 PM
-
I use it occasionally for exactly what it is: a quick reference for basic changes for jazz standards.
I don't often play that kind of music myself any more, but those "harmonic devices" are the foundation of all popular music (including jazz) up until the late 1950s, most pop and rock music since, and a sizable proportion of modern jazz.
Your question seems to imply that those kinds of changes are in some way outdated. The compositions are obviously all of a certain vintage (1920s-40s mostly I'd guess), but the changes employed are simply standard practices in functional harmony (major and minor keys) - the death of which is often exaggerated.
. (Classical music thought it had done away with it over 100 years ago, having exhausted its potential. But it lives on vibrantly in popular music, and probably always will - because pop music is not interested in development, only in periodically rearranging the familiar.)
Jazz, OTOH, IS interested in development, in moving ahead, but still - despite the various post-modal revolutions of the last 50 years - seems to find functional harmony frequently useful. At least, jazz musicianship depends on an intimate appreciation of its history, which grew (totally) out of the soil of the Great American Songbook. It may be that those old changes are often used ironically today, with tongue-in-cheek. But knowledge of them matters. They are still respected - same way one respects one's grandparents, if not always taking them too seriously.
-
I think of the vanilla changes as the "skeleton". Give any two artists the same skeleton and ask them to sculpt a fully-fleshed model of a person on top of that skeleton and you'll get two very different looking people. OK, so I've tortured the analogy but the point is that the skeleton shows what are common, baseline "requirements" of the song's harmonic structure and then you can see/hear how different people have chosen to embellish it. Sometimes, for example, we get so used to hearing a b9 in something that we don't realize that that was just a particular artist's choice of embellishment and wasn't fundamental to the tune itself.
-
Thanks for the comments. I get where you guys are coming from re: the extensions, but I'm asking about something a little deeper about the changes themselves. Patt's site tends to break things down to the point where I don't even recognize the classic 3/7s jazz voice leading anymore.
For example, take Autumn Leaves:
Key of G (Em) 4/4 Pickup | E7 |
[: Am7 | D7 | G | G | 1._____________________________| F#m7b5 | B7 | Em | Em :] 2.______________________________| Em | Em | B7 | B7 || Em | Em | Am7 | D7 | | G | G || F#m7b5 | B7 | | Em | Em | F#m7b5 | B7 || Em | Em |
Now I've never heard or seen this tune without a Cmaj7 in the fourth bar (to continue the cycle of 4ths bass line) or the descending tritones in the last A section. I even have the classic Jo Stafford version that I'm listening to, and it's more complicated than this. Ironically, due to the orchestral stuff it's more complicated than a lot of later bop version, too. This is what I'm talking about when I say that the harmonic concepts are "obselete". I'm not talking about a basic ii-V. I'm talking about his tendency to put in shifts from IM to IVM or to just have a B7 sitting for two bars and not using the ii-V concepts.
I guess I don't understand where Patt's changes come from. I know he's been around for a long time, so I'm not sure if it's a case of him having encountered these on bandstands throughout the years, but they seem almost overly simple. Even to be a skeleton.Last edited by ecj; 04-13-2013 at 02:28 PM. Reason: yikes, formatting sucks, but you get the idea
-
He lays it out pretty clearly on his website:
This book attempts to uncover the basic ("Vanilla") chord changes to over 400 of the most commonly played jazz "standards".
There are many good books that show how to use chord substitutions, but if the basic chord changes are not known, substitutions and embellishments often confuse the improviser and the listener.
Embellishments to basic chords such as added 6ths, 9ths, 13ths, flat 5ths etc. are usually determined by the melody notes and the style of music being played.
Chord substitutions are influenced by the style of jazz being played and the individual preference of the musicians.
The purpose of this book is to help the jazz player learn the basic "changes" and allow the player to add embellishments and substitutions on a solid framework.
Basic chord progressions are somewhat subjective. This book reflects the way I hear these tunes and is meant to be a starting point in the never ending quest for the "right" chord changes. I'm open to different opinions. I hope this can be used as a forum to discuss basic chord progressions to jazz standards.
Last edited by Jonzo; 04-13-2013 at 02:41 PM.
-
RP called them "Vanilla Changes" because they are the chords at the most basic, cowboy level. Basic fundamental harmony reduced to its simplest form. No color, no added ii-V motion, no descending half steps, no tritone subs. Vanilla, no sprinkles, no hot fudge, no nuts, no cherry on top.
Originally Posted by ecj
I collect vintage guitar methods and songbooks as well as the occasional piece of sheet music and most of the Great American Songbook stuff began as really, really simple stuff. For instance, the original version of Out of Nowhere is G/G/Eb7/Eb7. No G Maj7 to G6 to Bbm7 to Eb7. Just "Vanilla". Most of the sounds that we are used to hearing are the result of embellishments that have been made to really simple songs by arrangers and musicians that have "stuck" and have become part of the harmonic identity of those songs. Most were not part of the original.
I have heard Autumn Leaves played without the IVmaj7 in the fourth bar and I may have an old songbook with it. If I can find it I'll let you know. The part that I highlighted in your quote is the whole idea of Vanilla Changes.
-
I would like to see all the songs in Nashville number format or Roman numeral format. there was a webpage where you could copy and paste chords and lyrics into it and it would convert it to the Nashville number system or Roman numeral. cannot find the page.
-
Well, there you go, then. Now you know what to do with your next rainy week-end..! Originally Posted by bobsguitars09
-
Interesting. I'd love to see some of the charts. If you find them, please let me know what books you have them in. Originally Posted by monk
Almost all the Real Books are just transcriptions of some tune or another, so they include extensions and modifications just because someone did them. I regularly pull licks from records, so I'd been trying to find something to view as the "baseline" to apply everything on top of.
The thing I find confusing about the Vanilla Book is that when I'm learning a tune I generally try to find the first well-known recorded version to start my studies off of. So, things like Dorothy Day singing Secret Love. Most of those versions are actually fairly complicated because they have intricate orchestral arrangements. I've always been interested to know if there's a way to get a hold of the original sheet music. What did Cole Porter write down when he put together Under My Skin?
Thanks for the thoughts.
-
Any chart is a suggestion, not a rule. If you're going to play jazz, eventually you're going to have to trust your ears too. The vanilla book is a great way to get the "meat and potatoes" of a song, and then your ear does the rest...it takes a while...learning jazz isn't something you do in a few weekends...
-
Not exactly what you mentioned, but this might interest you. Progressions available in numeral as well as in any key. You need a login to view the charts but registration is free. Originally Posted by bobsguitars09
Realbook Jazz Charts
-
+1, Mr. B! Almost without exception, the lead sheets we all use are, at best, guidelines to start from and not really intended to be the master interpretation for any of the songs. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
wiz
-
BUMP
You can buy no limit of old sheet music on eBay, or better yet, keep an peeled for good deals on your local Craigslist. Some people think their tattered old scores are worth an absolute mint, but if you wait a bit you can find somebody selling them for a more realistic two bucks a pop. These almost always have chord charts for ukulele or banjo or guitar...I never pay attention to those myself, as they always have fakebook style chords notated above the treble staff too; and there's always a left hand piano bass notated as well. Whether those line up with the suggested chord - or whatever is in Cole Porter's manuscripts - is something I've always been curious about. Originally Posted by ecj
Something to keep in mind about those old composers is that many of them were more than a bit rudimentary in regards to harmonic concepts - they just knew how their songs were supposed to sound, and often a musical secretary or two would be on hand to figure out what that was. Johnny Mercer would just write down stuff like "DDD^E DDDvC." The arrows indicated which direction the melody was going in. You may be familiar with this tune - Dream. He also played everything with 1 finger. The secretary's job was to figure if Mercer wanted a maj7 or flat 9, I guess. Johnny was the rudest of the rude technically speaking, but Berlin or Warren were scarcely much more accomplished, they say.
-
Well put. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
I really dig the concept of this book though I haven't used it directly.
I think if you learn enough songs (and transpose them to different keys), you will write your own version of this book in your head.
On the other hand, kind of cool to have it all in one place.
-
Great story. Keeps it in perspective when the old 'original sheet music' gang start chiming in.... The original sheet music was probably arranged by the editor.... :-) Originally Posted by KLR
Last edited by christianm77; 03-18-2015 at 05:30 PM.
-
(Besides I'd be more interested in basing my interpretation on transcribing a super-swinging version by Ella or Nat Cole, than some old school tin pan alley chart, but that's me. I should probably check out the originals:-))
Last edited by christianm77; 03-18-2015 at 05:34 PM.
-
Another fun fact: while composers like Arlen or Gershwin certainly dug jazz in its various incarnations, many of the others intensely detested what Benny Goodman did to their songs, never mind boppers et al. Jerome Kern died rather early in the game mostly owing to how intense he was, and wouldn't bat an eye about screaming about the injustices committed to his music by big band arrangers.
The original score is interesting stuff to be sure - the incunabula of these songs, if you will. Ted Gioia recently published a book about jazz standards, analyzing a bit about how they evolved from their Broadway/Hollywood/Tin Pan Alley origins.
-
I was working with a student years ago on "Autumn Leaves" and he mentioned that his mother had the sheet music for the tune. The following week, he brought in the original 1947 edition (!) and sure enough, there was no Cmaj7 in bar 4. However, when Yves Montand sung the original French version a year earlier in the film, "Les Portes de la nuit", the IV chord had already been added to that bar. BTW, notice how most early instrumental versions of the tune were in G until Cannonball's classic take on "Something Else"? Who knows, maybe Cannonball played a concert chart on his alto and they decided that the transposed key of Bb sounded just fine. Originally Posted by ecj
This page is an excellent source for the history behind "Autumn Leaves": https://songbook1.wordpress.com/fx/1...autumn-leaves/
Regarding "Autumn Leaves" and fidelity to sheet music, "All The Things You Are" is a reverse case. I'm currently preparing someone for the jazz guitar course at the local conservatorium and we decided to focus on ATTYA for his audition. I suggested we go back to the earliest recordings to see how the melody and changes may have been altered over the years. We listened to Jack Leonard, Jo Stafford and Frank Sinatra. All of them sing a major 4th from the tonic on "all the things you ARE are mine" at the close rather than the expected major 6th (Db rather than F in the concert key). We then checked the original sheet music and it has the F! Were they copying each other rather than the original score or published sheet music?
-
Interesting stuff.
Modern versions of the changes are often at variance with the older changes. Stella springs to mind as a particularly well known example, but no doubt there are hundreds of others. (Which is part of the reason why I am leary of talking about the right changes - y'know people get cross when people do Em7b5 Bb7alt instead of Eo7 on Stella.... :-))
Patt's book could be a useful source for older styles of changes, I should look at it when I'm learning tunes.
It is a shame he didn't record his sources for tunes though.Last edited by christianm77; 03-18-2015 at 07:32 PM.
-
Oh - I'd always rather know the bare bones changes for everything, and then work on the common subs and my own stuff afterwards. Makes life easier.
-
In music school it was said that a lot of old sheet music was simplified for the target market. Tenor guitar, banjo, ukulele, were popular instrument and many of the home piano players only had basic skills. So they simplified the harmony and would put in chord sub's to offer easier chords. Even recording most expanded the tunes for biggest bands and orchestras. So finding the composers original concept for those tunes is hard. Originally Posted by KLR
-
Note that Ralph Patt (who has passed away, incidentally, and his family is keeping his website up and running as a resource for musicians) put it plainly: these chord layouts are how *he* hears the songs' basic structures. They are not canonical in any way. Neither, for that matter, is the Real Book in its original intention but it has become that way. There is a lot of stuff in the old Real Books that is just plain wrong (wrong notes in melodies, wrong chords, missing or extra bars- some of it is really quite egregious) and you can hear jazz musicians around the globe playing those tunes with those inaccuracies.
Since Autumn Leaves came up as an example, check the root movement of the chords Ralph lays out. It's very logical- more logical than the more familiar Real Book Vol 5 version, in my opinion. For one thing, the song is really in E minor rather than G major. The Vanilla Book changes make that more evident than the Real Book. I've noticed that the bassist in my band will often play the vanilla chords for the baseline rather than following the roots in the Real Book version slavishly.
Those two bar sections on a single chord allow the musician to have interpretive space in a way that doesn't happen as well if the version you know is in the Real Book. That arrangement is tighter harmonically with less room to move.
Peter Bernstein is well known for going to the New York Public Library when learning a new tune, searching out the earliest sheet music he can find of that song in order to have the clearest sense of what the composer intended. He ends up with some of the hippest on-the-fly arrangements I have ever heard as a result, because he knows the vanilla changes and can use them as a springboard rather than basing his interpretation on someone else's interpretation.
I find the Vanilla Book invaluable and check it often.
-
If Peter Bernstein does it, then I should. He's my favourite :-) Originally Posted by Cunamara
But I do think the whole thing about canonicity is a little suspect, as Patt reminded us, when it comes to tunes. That said depth of knowledge about any standard can't be a bad thing.
On the other hand, if I know all this stuff - and some super talented player perhaps with less depth of knowledge is on the gig, I'm going to play with them :-) But the knowledge gives flexibility.
-
I tire of always hearing Autumn Leaves played that way. Originally Posted by ecj
Ralph Patt's Vanilla Changes has helped me learn how to strip tunes down to their essential harmony (as implied by the melody). When I'm learning a tune, I'll often make my own vanilla chart from scratch, since I learn more from doing it myself than referring to Ralph's charts. I'll end up with a harmony closer to folk style. I might practice the tune at first with vanilla changes, then experiment with substitutions and see how they work with the melody. For some subs I might go with the real book, but some might take a different direction.
Of course when playing in ensemble I've got to play changes that are compatible with my bandmates. But I feel going through the "vanilla changes" process and experimenting with a variety of substitutions is helping me do that. And it helps release me from the real book trap.Last edited by KirkP; 03-18-2015 at 10:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
dearmond 1100 reissue vs original which one is...
Today, 03:30 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos