-
That's a great point. And Lydon even mentions in is book---which is aimed at beginners---that jazz melodies would be dull if they were just the notes of a major scale. They tend to blend major and minor. And this is good to remember when learning to solo.
Originally Posted by JonR
By they way, Mickey Baker is great at demonstrating this with what he calls "groove riffs", notes "forced" against the chord, but he doesn't explain why they work the way they do. But he does get that sound into a novice's ear, which may be more important.
-
06-27-2014 02:03 PM
-
Yes, that's a different element, which is what I think Reg was referring to when he said "how blue notes work with the different diatonic chord patterns. Modal interchange." Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
For me, there are three strands to jazz harmony:
1. The major-minor key system, "tonality", "functional harmony". Not quite CPP classical harmony, but many of those elements, somewhat simplified or more loosely interpreted. (Most of it coming from the "parlour" harmony of 19thC popular music, in fact.) The idea of one major scale, and one minor scale with variable 6th and 7th; and the tertian chords that can be harmonised from those scales. The notion of a "tonic" with a family of contrasting chords, and root movement in 4ths up (5ths down) - ie the "circle progression" you first mentioned.
2. Modal harmony, mostly quartal chords. Non-functional, static, and not (significantly) present in jazz until 1959. Ubiquitous since.
3. Blues. Blues is a type of modal music, with very expressive melodic embellishments, notably "blue notes" of course, which are not fixed (tuned) pitches, but flexible ones, moving around between tuned pitches, and often sitting in contrast to them (eg minor 3rds on top of major chords). "Blues harmony" is almost a contradiction in terms, as it seems extremely crude and even nonsensical from a classical perspective.
IMO, in jazz, blues is better seen as melodic embellishments of the other kinds of harmony, particular of functional harmony, which benefits most from the funky edginess blues brings - like a cool slang accent on an old-fashioned language. Modal harmony has its own subtle moods, which blues (often) would tend to disrupt.
In most modern jazz, it's difficult (if not pointless) to separate these strands - and I haven't mentioned "free" influences too, timbral factors, let alone the crucial rhythmic traditions - but I find this perspective on the harmony itself helpful.
Just my $0.02...
Last edited by JonR; 06-28-2014 at 06:47 AM.
-
Yea.. great points and makes perfect sense. Not that magic.
Nice .02 Jon.
-
Hi, everybody, I'm Michael Lydon, the guy who came up with the name, The Magic Sequence--what somebody else calls Bach's telephone number!! I LOVE that!
The reason I call the I-IV-VII-III-VI-II-V-I sequence magic is because rolling through all those V-I movements (all but one of which, as several people have pointed out, are perfect fourths) creates a lovely momentum. Strum the chords while you hum an easy melody, and suddenly you're a composer.
Get together with a pal who strums the chords (or record the sequence a dozen times) then improvise melodies using only notes on the major scale. You'll see how balanced phrases begin to happen almost of their own accord.
Yes to everybody who spots the Magic Sequence (or pieces of it) in great songs. Practicing the whole sequence on its own is great preparation for all those songs.
Also: it's worth practicing the Magic Sequence around the Circle of Fifths: play it in C, then G, then D, etc then through the flat keys. You'll start to notice and feel the many, many symmetries of Bach's beloved wheel!!
The magic of the Magic Sequence--that's magic I believe in!
-
Welcome aboard, Michael! I"m thrilled that you're here.
-
It may be slightly off topic, but I thought I nevertheless add some thoughts to this. Originally Posted by JonR
Yes, that's a different element, which is what I think Reg was referring to when he said "how blue notes work with the different diatonic chord patterns. Modal interchange."
For me, there are three strands to jazz harmony:
1. The major-minor key system, "tonality", "functional harmony". Not quite CPP classical harmony, but many of those elements, somewhat simplified or more loosely interpreted. (Most of it coming from the "parlour" harmony of 19thC popular music, in fact.) The idea of one major scale, and one minor scale with variable 6th and 7th; and the tertian chords that can be harmonised from those scales. The notion of a "tonic" with a family of contrasting chords, and root movement in 4ths up (5ths down) - ie the "circle progression" you first mentioned.
2. Modal harmony, mostly quartal chords. Non-functional, static, and not (significantly) present in jazz until 1959. Ubiquitous since.
3. Blues. Blues is a type of modal music, with very expressive melodic embellishments, notably "blue notes" of course, which are not fixed (tuned) pitches, but flexible ones, moving around between tuned pitches, and often sitting in contrast to them (eg minor 3rds on top of major chords). "Blues harmony" is almost a contradiction in terms, as it seems extremely crude and even nonsensical from a classical perspective.
IMO, in jazz, blues is better seen as melodic embellishments of the other kinds of harmony, particular of functional harmony, which benefits most from the funky edginess blues brings - like a cool slang accent on an old-fashioned language. Modal harmony has its own subtle moods, which blues (often) would tend to disrupt.
In most modern jazz, it's difficult (if not pointless) to separate these strands - and I haven't mentioned "free" influences too, timbral factors, let alone the crucial rhythmic traditions - but I find this perspective on the harmony itself helpful.
Just my $0.02...
As expressed in other threads before, I doubt the differentiation between major/minor on the one side and modal on the other side, in the sense of the first pair of scales being "functional" and the other scales being non functional / static. Many modal scales have their own system of very strong functional relationships, in the meaning that harmonic sequences create expectations of consequential chords and patterns. We might be in the realm of semantics here, so if one reserves the word 'functional harmony' to traditional major and minor scale based harmony, thats fine with me. But not all modal based harmony work is 'static' as compared to the 'dynamic' functionality of major and minor scales. There are always functional relationships that can be heard, if one only spends long enough in a certain scale and the derived (diatonic) harmonies.
Then there are quartal chords. In my opinion, the use of quartal chords is not logically connected with or reserved to modes. Nor are quartal chords by definition non functional. One can reharmonise a piece which is written in a major key and perfectly functional, with diatonic quartal chords based on the same major scale, and the piece will still work. So - while quartal chords doubtless reduce functional meaning, they dont automatically extinguish such meaning. It all depends - for example, a Cmaj69 chord can be understood as a quartal chord, using B - E - A - D over C as bass. The possibilities are very wide, and borders between functional and non functional use of quartal chords are blurred, both in major/minor and modal based musics.
As is obvious, this is just another 2c thrown into the discussion, without claim to have subscribed to the truth channel. JonR's categorisation no doubt describes well the main concepts, but I may play the role if pointing out the shades in between. :-)Last edited by Phil in London; 06-30-2014 at 04:17 AM.
-
...The Truth Channel, that's really good, thanks
-
A question if I may, The chords E-A-D in the sequence, what are they, minor, 7, something else?
Sorry I'm very new to the Jazz guitar world and do not yet know all the mechanisms.
Al B.
-
The minus sign (-) means (usually) minor 7 chord. A chord without any sign (such as G) is assumed to be major. It is often assumed this major may be a major sixth or a major seventh. And "7" means dominant seventh. (There's no standardization of chord symbols, so different people use different ones.) Originally Posted by Al B.
-
Hello
I saw someone recently refer to "Bach's phone number", a pianist I think… (?)
You can also cook the chord sequence down to different voicings of "1 6 2 5"
CMaj7 FMaj7 Bm7b5 E- A- D- G7 CMaj7 to
C (A7) Fmaj7 G7/B and C/E A-7 D- G7 to
C A7 Dm7 G7 and C A7 Dm7 G7
In this way I found "I got rythm" / "Oleo" changes really usefull for building the trad. jazz vocabulairy
The bridge of Oleo is also a variant of 1 6 2 5
Last edited by vhollund; 08-06-2014 at 06:09 AM.
-
-
Rob referred to it that way on this very thread, back around post #4. He said his first music teacher told him that and he'd never forgotten "Bach's phone number": 1473625. Originally Posted by vhollund
-
Rob referred to it that way on this very thread, back around post #4. He said his first music teacher told him that and he'd never forgotten "Bach's phone number": 1473625. Originally Posted by vhollund
-
I'd never heard about Bach's phone number until reading this Forum but I love it, and using it is one of the reasons Bach's music has such powerful forward momentum. Since I've heard it, I've been thinking of it as a real phone number:
1-473-6251
Adding the final 1 shows how the sequence comes home.
-
I did the same thing! Great minds.... ;o) Originally Posted by MichaelLydon
Reply With Quote
Musima Record
Today, 08:47 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos