-
cool read prince... thanks
-
11-26-2019 11:07 PM
-
This seems pertinent as well:
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewc...&context=gamut
-
Since I'm still not sure exactly what "modern harmonic concepts" are, I'd love to see an example of a standard reharmonized accordingly.
Or maybe just a list of a few tunes that fit that description.
My impression is that some things by Andre Mehmari or maybe Hermeto Pascoal, which have no clear feeling of key, fit this description, but I'm not sure. I googled it and watched a video without really figuring it out beyond the idea that it's more ambiguous in terms of resolution than functional harmony.
-
In regards to analysis of Wayne Shorters tunes and what was played with Miles 2nd quintet, one must take into consideration the whole scene during that time was quite influenced by what Ornette and similar guys had been doing a few years earlier.
Herbie stopped playing chords allowing for much more harmonic freedom etc, being more concerned about melodies rather than the underlying chords, things Ornette had been doing since the late 50's (not using any chord instrument at all).
So when playing Shorter tunes from that period, Ron of course was also influenced by this, and had lots of freedom to play whatever he liked (even on the tunes that had fixed chords during solos like most of Shorters tunes had).
It was all about exploring, challenging old conventions, energy, grabbing the moment, and just playing their asses off!
Sometimes people miss the forest (the whole macro picture) for the trees.
This is also partly why the real book chord analysis is many times wrong.
To summarize, if there is a note that doesn't really make sense, or make the chord progression/melody very strange, not corresponding to the conventional harmony, it might as well just be Ron, Wayne, Miles, or Herbie grabbing a note that felt good at that particular moment. Or might even be a mistake.Last edited by greveost; 11-27-2019 at 07:50 PM.
-
Is this generally considered "modern harmony"?
-
Originally Posted by greveost
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
And just to clarify, even with Miles, they rarely left the harmonic vehicle completely, like for example Ornette, but they had a very free/liberal, pragmatic, and spontaneus approach to the harmony.
And even with the arrangements as such.
For example, with the example above Nefertiti, they did not plan ahead to not take any solos on that tune, it was just that Tony just kept doing what he was doing, and the rest just followed and no one wanted to take a solo, if I remember correctly, and that's how it turned out on the album.
-
Yeah I think that’s true. What’s attractive about Wayne’s solo albums of the same period is how much they cleave to that heavy swing/blues blue note thing while having all the odd changes and elusive melodies.
However it’s interesting that taking about ‘modern jazz’ (50+ year old music) always focusses on harmony. The mention of Ornette might remind us that the main innovations of jazz of this era were actually coming from a sensibility of greater melodic and rhythmic freedom and a backgrounding of harmony. Conrad Cork makes the argument that jazz was always moving towards greater freedom.
Coltrane did it all, but his tunes of this era were getting more and more vamp based and then obviously free towards the end of the decade.
And then the freeish vamp thing became preeminent in fusion and jazz rock via Miles... until everyone got sick of that and Metheny started writing songs with rock/pop and modal influenced harmony... (super simplified history I know)
Now of course we take it as read that progress in jazz consists of more and more complicated chords and chord progressions being introduced into jazz.
I think there’s a few reasons for this. The role of academic jazz courses sure. Gary Burton was making music a certain way for instance, and his pivotal role influenced the teaching fundamentally.
Also what can be well taught in an environment basically designed for Western European music is also self selecting.
Even copyright law itself had a role to play. We can’t talk about melodies in instructional books, but we can talk about chords, scales and solos. I can’t monetise my channel for instance. But I want to talk about melodies. And as these take over (along with apps like iReal) more and more people will think jazz = the study of chord symbols. Even contact with educators irl may nor do much to dispel that.
-
Ok I’m looking at Ana Maria. Do we need to solo on the form of this tune? Neither Kurt nor Wayne appear to do this.
Or are you interested as to what makes the chords work?
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Thank you for starting this thread. Apart from KB, a bit of GG Wes Herb, it is the current guys that I really love to listen to especially Jonathan Kreisberg. It is fascinating that to my ears as different his version of Autumn in New York it to KB's somehow they sound similar (maybe cause it is the same song der!!). His I think it is 5/4 time version of Summertime is just a ripper, I cannot think of another version that sounds like that such a dark heavy and groovy intro, the guys is so under appreciated in my opinion. No actually he is under appreciated full stop.
Here is an interesting analysis of his playing on Autumn in New York
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
I’ll take a closer look if I get time.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Here's a fragment of Moonstone.
Moonstone
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Tune is somewhat functional but coloured with interesting extensions etc.
That Eb/E chord is obv a sub for dim, but also works as a maj7#9#11 sound, which brings us back to Wayne:
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
As far as Moonstone goes, let's take the first 3 bars. Eb/E ... is it functioning as a diminished? 13b9? I have no idea.
Perhaps it is a chromatic lower neighbor to the D/E which is functioning as a iim in D. That is, a sub for Em7. Played E A D F# it looks a lot like an Em11. The next chord is A13sus, which is suggestive of a ii V. So, by this theory, this is a ii V with a chromatic lead-in. But, I'm not sure that's either correct or helpful. The 4ths in those voicings give it a different sound and the resolution isn't to Dmaj.
One nice thing -- his harmonies are all playable on guitar.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
In a way this is more obviously understandable than Jobim.... of course Jobim is functional.
Non functional harmony maybe doesn’t exist? Jazz musicians are lazy?
-
I have a vague idea of what modal interchange is (I looked it up), but it feels like a post-hoc thing. That is, there are all kinds of possibilities, but they don't all work. I don't see how to use the idea predictively. Some subs work and, it seems to me, you still have to learn the sounds one at a time. As far as expanding references and all that, I'm still decoding.
The original track of Ana Maria does something I see top pros do more often than I expected. They don't necessarily play a tune the most difficult possible way. Here, they play the chart and solo on a simple vamp. You can label the vamp this way or that, but if you play the notes in an Ebmajor scale in a nice melodic way, nobody will complain.
The A section starts with Gmaj7 to Cm7/G in my chart. (I have to sit down with recording and check the changes). Easy enough to hear, but I don't know how to analyze it in a way that the analysis is helpful. Maybe the tonal center is simply changing from G to Eb.
I'll stop writing here, since I have even less to say about the rest right now.
Oh, some examples of pros: Robert Glasper played a wonderfully bizarre take on Stella, and they soloed on a vamp of the last 8 measures, not the entire tune.
Eliane Elias soloed on long 2 5 3 6 vamps.
And, of course, Ana Maria.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Thing is pros don’t have that much practice and rehearsal time. They have to make things doable for themselves and other players.
-
So maybe we don't understand... what harmony is... functional Harmony. When you start talking about harmony with voice leading and voicings... well yea maybe you don't understand harmony.
So when you try and understand modern harmony with non harmony understandings... you get where... ?
So a possibility to keep Ana functional with standard analysis... keep in same tonal box...
The Gma7 to C-7/G to G7sus to C-7/G can be as simple as...
Ima7 / IV-7 V-7 IV-7 all over a pedal G, and the use of IV- and V- are simple classical technique of Relative and Parallel Borrowing. Standard Functional Harmony for expanding camouflaging harmonic Movement.
And even simply... Imaj (ionian), to Imin. (phry.), to I7 (mixo), to Imin. or I could use Functional labels above with their modal chord scale label.
So Gma7 is tonal tonic.
C-7/G is just C-7 with use of a pedal G. (Or inversion) same function and basic harmonic reference and which is IV-7 from Gmin the Relative Parallel Minor of Gmaj.
G7sus is... either inversion of D-7, or typical sub of D-7... the standard II- V7 jazz chord pattern... so is again just V-7 form Relative Parallel Borrowing.
Modern jazz harmony would typically just label or call this application... modal interchange. Which is just expanding the technical organization of "Borrowing". The expanding part is... using different references for creating chord movement and it's organization.
Which uses both Functional Labels and CST labels.... the CST is just an organization of possible complete pitch collection possible. There are many possibilities... the rest of the tune is just more applications of this.... short blocks of harmonic movement with melody and connections .
If you really want to get into analysis of Ava I can go on... it's not that complicated.
If you just expand you playing skills to have a slightly larger selection of material to pull from... memorized licks.... you just plug and play with 12 step organization approach for melodic organization... the heart felt beautiful playing that only real musicians who play arpeggios can. LOL
-
I understand this type of explanation, but I find it profoundly unsatisfying.
Perhaps I find all theory annoying and unsatisfying.... it all has a germ of truth in it, and the germ can take you a ways, but...praxis is more interesting.
You can justify any old shit boring modern jazz floaty composition using the logic in that post. I’ve written a ton of them. But why did Wayne write those tunes the way he did? And why are they so good? There’s clearly something else going on. Something more specific....
I’m more interested in what musicians do...
-
Generally because he's good at it...
And maybe the boring and unsatisfied aspects are from not understanding, or not being able to to perform using them...I don't know... but they work and have worked for years.
-
Reading Rp's post...
"I have a vague idea of what modal interchange is (I looked it up), but it feels like a post-hoc thing. That is, there are all kinds of possibilities, but they don't all work. I don't see how to use the idea predictively. Some subs work and, it seems to me, you still have to learn the sounds one at a time. As far as expanding references and all that, I'm still decoding."
Pretty much sums it up.
Or maybe as Christian said.... Jazz Musicians are lazy.
-
Originally Posted by Reg
I suspect he wrote really good melodies that kind of wander about in interesting ways and cool rhythmic hooks and backs them up with funny chords that sound right to him...
20 years later someone writes a phd.
And maybe the boring and unsatisfied aspects are from not understanding, or not being able to to perform using them...I don't know... but they work and have worked for years.
-
... Pretty tonal easy to hear harmony version
here is another
And of course here is the most viewed version
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
You really think he wrote that melody first.?
Ed Cherry at Small Last Night (6/3/24)
Today, 09:07 PM in The Players