How do you create movement on a I chord?

[pingu]

Pete Bernstein:

... and most people who've studied directly with Barry Harris:

Similarly, it's becoming more common to play the original ii-biiio7-ii-V changes in bar 6 of "Darn that Dream" (Bm7-Bbo7-Am7-D7) rather than the parallel minors (Bm7-Bbm7-Am7-D7) requiring an alteration of the melody from 'E' to 'F' on beat 3 that are in the Real Book.

wow ... that first chord of Stella being
Bbo or C#o (with the A melody note)
is so great ....

I way prefer that to the Em11 A7 change now
thanks guys ....

Barris Harris has a wealth of stuff to say
on that video too

[Reg]

Yea... lots of ways to play stella... but what is that 1st chord... where is that Dim voicing really from. If you were to solo and play over that 1st voicing, what are the rest of the notes you might use to create relationships, develop etc.

You usually define what the function is from an analysis and go from there.... or just trial and error etc...

Where is that Dim chord from... is it standard symmetrical 8 note usage Bb C Db Eb Fb G G A or maybe a leading tone dim. function, or is it really from Dhar. min. just the the V7 chord... A7b9b13 over a Bb.

Anyway where I'm going is there are many versions of what the real changes to tunes are. And generally playing tunes in a jazz style doesn't involve playing the same changes over and over. Generally when one solos... they don't play the same lick over and over, (I mean creative improv) or just play the melody five choruses in a row... it works... and on a tune like Shorter's "Pinocchio", probable not a bad idea. But again generally improv involves creating relationships and developing them with interaction with rest of musicians performing tune.

So in direction of what I was posting on above... you generally have an analysis of a tune... which could just be a road map with tonal targets... the important spatial points of a tune where one believes helps the tune work and the general tonal references. So the process of creating harmonic motion, chordal movement generally would have reference to that analysis. ( of which Barry has his approach, as well as Peter)

Hey Christian... thanks. Yea this time of year I'm all over the place, playin all kinds of music. Another month or two.

[EDS]

Message that this video is private. Try setting to public or unlisted?

Thanks - I don't know how to youtube. I used their video editor to cut down the raw video so as not enact cruel punishment making someone listen to 10 minutes of comping - I think this caused it be private?

[christianm77]

Yea... lots of ways to play stella... but what is that 1st chord... where is that Dim voicing really from. If you were to solo and play over that 1st voicing, what are the rest of the notes you might use to create relationships, develop etc.

You usually define what the function is from an analysis and go from there.... or just trial and error etc...

Where is that Dim chord from... is it standard symmetrical 8 note usage Bb C Db Eb Fb G G A or maybe a leading tone dim. function, or is it really from Dhar. min. just the the V7 chord... A7b9b13 over a Bb.

Anyway where I'm going is there are many versions of what the real changes to tunes are. And generally playing tunes in a jazz style doesn't involve playing the same changes over and over. Generally when one solos... they don't play the same lick over and over, (I mean creative improv) or just play the melody five choruses in a row... it works... and on a tune like Shorter's "Pinocchio", probable not a bad idea. But again generally improv involves creating relationships and developing them with interaction with rest of musicians performing tune.

So in direction of what I was posting on above... you generally have an analysis of a tune... which could just be a road map with tonal targets... the important spatial points of a tune where one believes helps the tune work and the general tonal references. So the process of creating harmonic motion, chordal movement generally would have reference to that analysis. ( of which Barry has his approach, as well as Peter)

Hey Christian... thanks. Yea this time of year I'm all over the place, playin all kinds of music. Another month or two.

Glad to hear it.

That's a very important point regarding the diminished chord. The function of the chord is terribly important.

The io7/biiio7/#ivo7 chord (common tone diminished?) has always been a funny one. What to do with that? These type of contexts - in Bb:

Eb Eo7 Bb
Cm C#o7 Dm
G7 Bbo7 Bb

These dim7s do not function as secondary dominants (for example I #Io7 IIm can be understood as I VI7b9 IIm or a secondary dominant going to the II) but rather as bridging chords - often with chromatic thirds in the voice leading, e.g.:

Eb --> E --> F
C--> C#--> D

Romantic era stuff.

What do you play on these?

- Blues phrases (the b5 and b3 are great)
- Dim arps (of course!) paying attention to the voice leading
- Diminished scale. I think this the kind of context where the dim scale really comes into its own - a diminished scale is kind of what you get when you add lower neighbours to a dim7 anyway... So this kind of pattern has been around for ages, as has harmonising a 7 of the key (A in Bb) with a dim chord on I or bIII. See Basin Street Blues turnaround for a very pretty example...
- Harmonic minor/minor dominant thingy
I like this - over a Bbo7, we take Eb7 scale and raise the Eb to E (so we get F harmonic minor) as if we were going to F7, but instead resolve to a Bb major phrase. Takes a bit of practice. Sounds good to me...

But these things also go the other way:

Dm Dbo7 Cm

Weirdly I would handle bIIIo7 differently here. On How Insensitive, Dm Dbo7 Cm7 I would tend to go D melodic minor - D harmonic minor - C Dorian. Just sounds better to me, even though theoretically these chords should all be interchangeable... Makes for lovely smooth flowing melodies if you just track the changes between the scales.

We can see the first few bars of Stella as being a bIIIo7 IIm7 V7 thing, like How Insensitive without the Dm.

Alternatively we can see the progression as:

Eo7 | % | F7 | % | C7

In which case the Eo7 becomes a minor tinged secondary dominant going to F7 (i.e. C7b9.)

Anyway, that's my tuppence...

[matt.guitarteacher]

Ha. Oh well. I'm on my phone, but why don't you watch the YouTube video on making your video public or unlisted? Sounds silly , but it's probably the easiest way to figure it out.

[christianm77]

Getting back to the original question, if we see the first chord as Io7 and sub it as bIIIo7, we can play this:

| Bb Cm7 | C#o7 Dm7 ----> to the top
| Dbo7

[EDS]

But these things also go the other way:

Dm Dbo7 Cm

Weirdly I would handle bIIIo7 differently here. On How Insensitive, Dm Dbo7 Cm7 I would tend to go D melodic minor - D harmonic minor - C Dorian. Just sounds better to me, even though theoretically these chords should all be interchangeable... Makes for lovely smooth flowing melodies if you just track the changes between the scales.

One other approach - I've always like to think of them as secondary dominants, even if they're not functioning strictly as one.

For example: Em7, Ebdim7, Dm7, G7

I like to think of the Ebdim7 as a V7b9 of V - even though theres a ii between it. Like you said, its not a 2nd-ary dominant, but it works for me.

Or if its a common-tone dim7, I like to think of it as the V of iii even though it resolves to I.

[EDS]

Ha. Oh well. I'm on my phone, but why don't you watch the YouTube video on making your video public or unlisted? Sounds silly , but it's probably the easiest way to figure it out.

I thought I fixed it- its not a big deal if you can't see it though. Weird, I've done Youtube videos before without this problem.

[christianm77]

One other approach - I've always like to think of them as secondary dominants, even if they're not functioning strictly as one.

For example: Em7, Ebdim7, Dm7, G7

I like to think of the Ebdim7 as a V7b9 of V - even though theres a ii between it. Like you said, its not a 2nd-ary dominant, but it works for me.

Or if its a common-tone dim7, I like to think of it as the V of iii even though it resolves to I.

The ii can always be ignored, so you have effectively, Em7 (C) D7b9 G7

This works of course - it's the smae thing as going F F#o7 G7 incidentally, although seeing it as a D7b9 might give you other ideas of what to do one it - such as Eb melodic minor/D altered. In this case, we have the common ii-V sub for this type of progression.

C Ebm Ab7(#11) Dm G7

Or
Em Ebo7 Dm
becomes
Em Ebm Dm

See also the comments on Darn That Dream above.

[GuitarGerry]

Seeing as we're now on the topic of the bIII dim chord, there are two approaches that I take when improvising over it. The first is to simply ignore it. In the majority of cases the chord is transient, sandwiched between the III and II chords. Perhaps not starting on the very first beat of the bar, but if you start improvising over the II chord during the duration of the bIII dim, it works by anticipation.


The second approach I take is similar to voice leading. No arpeggios, no scales, just think about where you've been and where you're going. Diatonic, non-chord notes (NCNs) tend to want to resolve downwards to the nearest chord note (CN). NCNs a semitone above CNs create clashes that want to resolve immediately. However, as a rule of thumb any diatonic NCN a tone above its point of resolution (CN) may be left unresolved. Especially when played in the upper register (after all, extensions appear above chords, not below). Those notes tend to have sweetness, and they're the ones I aim for over diminished chords.


In the case of the bIII dim chord, look for the diatonic notes a tone above CNs. There are three and they provide varying degrees of sweetness. Rather than trying to target them, try leading into them from the III chord. The root of the III moves up a semitone over the dim chord. The 7th of the III remains stationery over the dim chord. The 5th of the III chord remains stationary over the dim chord. Whether you resolve these notes to the CN a tone below, is entirely up to you, but this approach sounds more melodic to my ears that any diminished scale of arpeggio.

First post of the morning, so buyer beware (groggy head may have lead to slight drivel/mistakes in this post).

[GuitarGerry]

First post of the morning, so buyer beware (groggy head may have lead to slight drivel/mistakes in this post).

And/or misspelling of the word 'led'.

[Irez87]

Thank you, Gerry! Finally, someone talking about melodic improvisation practice. Sometimes, when we use subs or try and play the most complex changes (or what is written) our melodic control goes out the window... Especially if we don't have a SUPER AIRTIGHT control over the harmony. I actually practice what Gerry speaks of in his second approach more than I practice playing strict changes these days... gasp (**sounds of jazz police sirens**)

Who taught me to play this way. Well, I got the first inkling of an idea from this dude:

Reg, I hope you've kept that guy (Kenny Wessel) on your radar. He played with a bunch of jazz peeps (such as Ornette) and he played with Steely Dan.

Yupe, you can practice being melodic by stripping back the harmony like this guy said:

In his TrueFire course about playing in a combo

THEN, once you've mastered the stripped down version, harmonically, then, you can start adding harmony.

[Reg]

So EDS... listen to your vid... cool, nice playing. Are you comping or soloing, meaning are you out front or are you behind someone.

Pretty dense voicings, lots of cluster type of voicings. If you comping your lead lines generally are on weak side of almost everything... or would be interacting with what the soloist is performing.

Your use of tensions is cool but the organization seems to pull from many sources... Do you have an harmonic organization scheme? How do you organize your use of #11's... Anyway... I'll listen again, but a possible turnaround or creating harmonic motion for last 4 bars might be...

Db-7 Gb7 / C-7 F7(#9) / Bb6/9 Ab13(Db13) / Gb13 F7#9 /, the chords in ( ) are options.

X X 9 9 7 X
X X 8 9 7 X
X X 8 8 6 X
X X 7 8 6 X or X X 7 8 9 X
X X 5 5 6 6
X X 4 5 6 6 or X X 3 4 4 6
X X 8 9 9 11
X 8 7 8 9 9

Hey Irex87... yea most musicians talk about melodic developments... especially guitarist, because they can't comp or work with harmonies. Generally because it's work, improve is generally much easier and more upfront fun. Every note implies a harmony, it's just whether you are or want to be aware of.

The striped down versions, Vanilla, also have implications, generally require more understandings of harmony because complete structures or Key notes are not played... which generally leads to maj/min functional harmony, becoming the organization of harmonic movement... becomes one reference and everything else becomes embellishments... vanilla.

Not good or bad, but different from a jazz perspective.

[GuitarGerry]

yea most musicians talk about melodic developments... especially guitarist, because they can't comp or work with harmonies. Generally because it's work, improve is generally much easier and more upfront fun. Every note implies a harmony, it's just whether you are or want to be aware of.

The striped down versions, Vanilla, also have implications, generally require more understandings of harmony because complete structures or Key notes are not played... which generally leads to maj/min functional harmony, becoming the organization of harmonic movement... becomes one reference and everything else becomes embellishments... vanilla.

Not good or bad, but different from a jazz perspective.

The acid test is to ask a musician to solo unaccompanied. My guitar tutor in the 80s once said to me "a good melody stands by itself". Generally speaking, that holds, especially with the old show tunes. You can sing many of them unaccompanied and there's still a sense of movement, logical conclusion and implied harmonic progression. Arguably, the same can apply to improvisation, and a melody played by a good improviser can stand alone, if they know what they're doing.


Another jazz guitarist, whose workshop I attended around that time in my life, also said something that has stuck with me for life. I'm paraphrasing, but it was along the lines of "my purpose when improvising is to try to equal or better the original melody". The older I get, the more I identify with that quote, but, as you rightly say, to do it well you need to understand harmony inside out. A lot of guitarists (mainly novices) who select 'tone centres' and play modally, fall flat on their face without accompaniment. But, as you also mentioned, if you choose to study the individual relationships that those notes have to the harmony they're used over, then it's possible to manipulate melodies to imply harmonic change.


Personally, playing melodically is all about balance. To use one approach, and only one approach, is banal. Different approaches for different progressions...and different types of music.

[fep]

A lot of guitarists (mainly novices) who select 'tone centres' and play modally, fall flat on their face without accompaniment. But, as you also mentioned, if you choose to study the individual relationships that those notes have to the harmony they're used over, then it's possible to manipulate melodies to imply harmonic change.

+1 to that

I want to hear the chords addressed and I want to hear a groove. And the groove, being in the pocket, that's probably the most important.

I think it's a mistake for someone learning jazz to take a tone center approach. Most of the time it just sounds like noodling.

[christianm77]

+1 to that

I want to hear the chords addressed and I want to hear a groove. And the groove, being in the pocket, that's probably the most important.

I think it's a mistake for someone learning jazz to take a tone center approach. Most of the time it just sounds like noodling.

The tone center approach is really good if the improvisor is playing a strong melody and is doing so with good time.

Those are two big ifs. In fact outlining chords literally is pretty boring to listen to although bursts of it can be fun. It's good to slide between levels of detail....

BTW if you play some older forms of jazz, you may find that there's rather a lot of one chord going on. Take the gypsy changes for Honeysuckle Rose:

C7 | % | % | % | F | % | % | % ||

and that's your A

Now you can do the 'invent new chord progressions and sub everything to hell' e.g.:

Gm C7 | Abm Db7 | Gm C7 | Dbm Gb7 | F D7 | Gm C7 | F | Am7b5 D7b9 ||

And the result will sound like bebop or even post bop depending on the subs. I do this sort of thing a lot. It's good honest fun and no-one gets hurt.

However, this is not how early jazzers did things. Most of the earlier guys played these melody things. Very often the soloing is based on elaboration of the original melody. Honeysuckle is perhaps the most quoted melody of all time as it functions as a fundamental melodic motif in Bird's playing (as mentioned by Carol Kaye, for instance.)

In fact soloing on one extended chord is pretty interesting challenge. You can do a lot with chord tones if you use a good rhythm, use some pretty embellishments and keep plenty of space.

In fact, I've got into playing melodies on F through the whole A (using the A minor and D minor triads,and the F pentatonic in particular) and really like the way it sounds. Charlie Christian actually uses and F6 kind of vibe with a bit of blues for the whole A on this tune. It sounds great.

I think it's good to slide between the two, you can go more general and introduce little clusters of complexity which catch the ear.... light & shade. But keeping it simple and playing a strong melody or some driving riffs - that's what swing playing taught me, and it's crazy how many very able modern players are unable to do this (opposite of what you'd think given how everyone is meant to be improvising on scales these days). If they don't have harmony they are lost...

That said, I think it's important to be able to outline the changes as well, I suppose, just don't feel that one has to do that all the time (if that makes any sense.) Also practicing making up melodies without reference to harmony is a really good thing too...

TL;DR noodling sounds like noodling because it is rhythmically weak. Strong rhythm makes melodies sound good...

[christianm77]

That's a thought actually - how many improvisors working on So What would just make up a nice melody on the Dorian mode, as opposed to doing all kinds of harmonic substitutions, triads and tetrachords through the mode and so on (all suggesting harmony)?

There aren't many heirs to Miles - who for me is the ultimate post war tone centre improvisor - just time, melody, blues feeling and tone colour, like one of the old guys. Most cats play harmonically.

EDIT: before anyone gets the wrong end of the stick with what I am saying, it's manifest that Miles did learn how to outline chords - Serpent's Tooth (for example) is just about the most outliney tune imaginable.

[Irez87]

"Hey Irex87... yea most musicians talk about melodic developments... especially guitarist, because they can't comp or work with harmonies. Generally because it's work, improve is generally much easier and more upfront fun."

Reg, can you clarify? I maybe misinterpreting your post here. Which musicians are you talking about, professionals?

[mr. beaumont]

That's a thought actually - how many improvisors working on So What would just make up a nice melody on the Dorian mode, as opposed to doing all kinds of harmonic substitutions, triads and tetrachords through the mode and so on (all suggesting harmony)?

There aren't many heirs to Miles - who for me is the ultimate post war tone centre improvisor - just time, melody, blues feeling and tone colour, like one of the old guys. Most cats play harmonically.

EDIT: before anyone gets the wrong end of the stick with what I am saying, it's manifest that Miles did learn how to outline chords - Serpent's Tooth (for example) is just about the most outliney tune imaginable.

I fail to see how playing melodically and outlining the chords have to be mutually exclusive?

[Irez87]

They aren't, Mr. Beaumont. They are interdependent. You need one to do the other. But... I stress the melodic part because people always focus on making the changes and often neglect the "be melodic" part while doing that. Dig?

I think it's a mistake for someone learning jazz to take a tone center approach. Most of the time it just sounds like noodling.

I agree, but, you need to really comfortable playing in a tonal center in order to know how those chords work within the tune. Playing just vertically without regard to the key is gonna mess you up as well. A iv bVII is not a ii V and bii bV is not a ii V in a key.

IMO, people often ignore harmonic rhythm because they are too busy trying to make the changes. What happens is the musical equivalent of "the spurts" (those of you who have IBS know what I mean) and the phrasing is lost. I did that last night on Giant Steps, and it sounded like a hot mess.

Why does this happen? A lot of people still practice with the metronome on two and four. Try it on the down beat. Or even better, try it on every 2 measures or every 4 measures.

You can't play a tune convincingly if you don't:

1. know the melody

2. know the sound of the chord changes (bass line, chord tones, guide tones)

3. know how the song functions in a key

4. know how the changes operate within the pulse of the tune, ie harmonic rhythm

These elements are interdependent not mutually exclusive. For instance, in order to know how the changes operate within the pulse of the tune, you have to be aware of the melodic cadence of the melody of the tune.

Bebop is not just playing the changes. Dizzy wasn't about that mess, and neither was Parker. Once you get beyond that myth, you can start to go places in your playing.

Try making music outta one key. I mean, music you would wanna post here. Jazz. Don't modulate, but don't noodle. It's harder than it sounds.

[GuitarGerry]

It's getting back to that thing about 'balance'. Not totally vertical and not totally based around a tone-centre. Understanding the vertical in order to manipulate the horizontal. Understanding which tones imply harmonic change and learning to lead into them.

I recently watched John Abercrombie's DVD on improvisation. I hadn't kept up with his career since the late 80s, but was pleasantly surprised by how melodic he sounds, yet still contemporary (my playing can sound a little dated, because I'm quite mainstream in my approach). His 'outside' playing works, because he understands how to play inside. He also covers the stuff we've being talking about...how his playing has evolved over the years to try to play melodically through changes, rather than in an obvious way...concentrating on individual intervals and doing the Bill Evans thing of spending a long time getting to know the nuances of an individual chord, or progression, rather than trying to tackle the whole world. Well worth watching, inspirational stuff.

[EDS]

So EDS... listen to your vid... cool, nice playing. Are you comping or soloing, meaning are you out front or are you behind someone.

Pretty dense voicings, lots of cluster type of voicings. If you comping your lead lines generally are on weak side of almost everything... or would be interacting with what the soloist is performing.

Your use of tensions is cool but the organization seems to pull from many sources... Do you have an harmonic organization scheme? How do you organize your use of #11's... Anyway... I'll listen again, but a possible turnaround or creating harmonic motion for last 4 bars might be...

Db-7 Gb7 / C-7 F7(#9) / Bb6/9 Ab13(Db13) / Gb13 F7#9 /, the chords in ( ) are options.

X X 9 9 7 X
X X 8 9 7 X
X X 8 8 6 X
X X 7 8 6 X or X X 7 8 9 X
X X 5 5 6 6
X X 4 5 6 6 or X X 3 4 4 6
X X 8 9 9 11
X 8 7 8 9 9

Hey Irex87... yea most musicians talk about melodic developments... especially guitarist, because they can't comp or work with harmonies. Generally because it's work, improve is generally much easier and more upfront fun. Every note implies a harmony, it's just whether you are or want to be aware of.

The striped down versions, Vanilla, also have implications, generally require more understandings of harmony because complete structures or Key notes are not played... which generally leads to maj/min functional harmony, becoming the organization of harmonic movement... becomes one reference and everything else becomes embellishments... vanilla.

Not good or bad, but different from a jazz perspective.

Thanks for the input - if I was comping for someone in real life, since I wouldn't throw in that many single-notes, but I just do it for fun and to practice it. To answer your question, I don't have scheme or concept to dealing with harmony, which is why I'm lurking around this place (to learn more.)

I'm going to work in your suggestion and see what happens - thats exactly what I was looking for- thanks. I feel that I have alot to draw on when it comes to voicings, but I don't do alot of superimposed changes except for basic ones, so I need to work on that.

[Reg]

Checking in again... few answers..

Irez87... all levels, there are many levels of pros also, right, most can cover, some have trouble when they get outside their box. Different styles of music have different Harmonic references......... different organization of harmonic motion and where that harmonic organization pulls from. Which comes down to the relationship between notes and intervals. I'm skipping the rhythmic etc...

What makes a melody or melodic lines sound good or bad, as said above " makes a melody stand by it's self"

Melodies don't work without relationships to other notes... which leads to harmonic reference. A 9th doesn't sound like a 9th with out a tonal reference.

Melodies and improve works because of references and relationships... Harmonic references. intervals or two notes played in a row works because of the relationship between themselves... or because of what has been implied. That what has been implied can be of the moment, from what has been played right before, or even from history, a standard that is already in our heads...

OK so all BS aside, most musicians don't think or understand all the technical BS, and don't really care to. Most do as what has been discussed above... know the melody, memorize the melody, memorize the changes, create a spatial form that keeps you from getting lost with out having to think.

Your creating references and relationships from memorizing tunes. Take a simple II V I... you know that the tonal reference can be the I chord... the harmonic movement, organization behind why the chords create motion and want to end up on the I chord is organized with the I chord being the tonal reference.

And you might understand some modal concepts... and be able to make the II- chord become the tonal target, create a different tonal organization which changes the function, (the organization behind why the chords create motion and where they want to end up). Example, / A-7 D7 / Gmaj7..../ becomes / A-7 .../ D7 Gma7 / Play some A- pentatonics and then play a F# on top of the D7 to a G on top of the Gma7 to an A on top of the A-7 ... you might start to hear a different tonal reference from same chords... which leads to making melodies have different reasons for bring able to stand on their own.

So again my point is... there are different methods of creating harmonic motion, and they generally have organization based on tonal references and relationships.

The Harmonic Rhythm of a tune is simply the spatial organization of tonal targets, (the references) and how they relate to each other, (the relationships).

Noodling generally happens from not knowing and understanding either. When you memorize melodies or spell changes you at least have references...

[Endorphins]

Good information, I wonder about more than a bar of the I chord.