-
I was just wondering the approach people take in a certain situation.
An example would be like the last two bars of Stella - two bars of Bbmaj7. Normally a turnaround type progression would work but obviously it doesn't work in the situation.
Normally, I play around the I chord (moving a shape through the key or playing different inversions) but I was wondering if anyone else takes a different approach in this situation? Thanks
-
09-24-2015 12:08 PM
-
Smile... Argh, I could show you with my guitar.
Look up Alan Kingstone's book:
Jazz School Online - Harmonic Method - Guitar
There are people who are better at explaining this than me. Peoples, I'm talking to you's... Vintage, Chris '77, monk, etc.
We got a winner here, have at it guys!
-
Thanks, I'll check out that video later!
Also I should add that I'm famililar with basic schemes to add movement on I - such as I, ii, iii or I, ii, #iidim, iii walkups or just general planing a shape - I'm just looking for more options or approaches.
-
Train your ear to hear modulations? I will leave my ear training push at that.
-
The I ii iii you mentioned... the iii is a substitution and the ii is a connecting or passing chord which also can be thought of as how do I get from here, the I chord, to here, the iii chord. Some old timers will refer to the I ii iii as a do re mi sub. Adding the #iidim adds an additional connector to the progression. You probably want the iii to be on a strong beat like the one of the next measure.
The iii is the secondary relative minor. The relative minor, the vi chord is also a sub. You can get there with a connector also if you want. Like Cmaj7 Bbm7 Am7, or Cmaj7 Bm7 Bbm7 Am7 with the Am7 being the sub and the Bm7 Bbm7 being the connectors.
The other thing you can do is visit the dominant...
| Cmaj7 / / G13 | Cmaj7... which opens up subs for the dominant like:
| Cmaj7 / Dm7 G13 | Cmaj7... or
| Cmaj7 / G13 Db9 | Cmaj7... or
| Cmaj7 / Dm9 Db9 | Cmaj7... or
| Cmaj7 / Ab7 G13 | Cmaj7... or
| Cmaj7 Am7 Dm9 G13 | Cmaj7... or
| Cmaj7 Eb9 D9 Db9 | Cmaj7... or
| Cmaj7 Bbm6 Am6 Abm6 | Cmaj7/G...etc.
You can also visit the dominant of the iii or vi sub. For the iii sub like:
| Cmaj7 / B7#5 F9 / Em7... etc.
For the vi chord like:
| Cmaj7 / E7#9 Bb13 | Am7... etc.
And then there are various extensions and/or alterations and/or various voicing to all of that.Last edited by fep; 09-24-2015 at 06:00 PM.
-
Doesn't work because you need to think ahead.
Originally Posted by EDS
Turnarounds in the last 2 work when the chord at the top of the tune is a I. This is true for a lot of tunes.
Now for a tune like Honeysuckle or Mellow Tone, we start on a II chord of some type, so we need a progression that sets that up - usual one is I | iii7b5 VI7(b9) or Bb | Dm7b5 G7(b9)
If it's a IV like Just Friends, we need to set things up in the last two - maybe a ii-V in I with a ii-V going to II, so Cm F7 | Fm Bb7 in the key of Bb
So for Stella? That's a tough one, because the first chord is so weird. Not sure it needs embellishment to be honest. A common move for #ivm7b5 is to go (in Bb)
Bb6 --> Gm6 --> Em7b5
But.. hmmmLast edited by christianm77; 09-24-2015 at 07:30 PM.
-
The opening Em7b5-A7b9 does seem weird but that's because it's a substitution for the original Bbo7. The whole movement makes more sense with the Bbo7. The closing Bbmaj7 moves back to the Bbo7 then Cm7 and F7: I or iii (Bbmaj9/Dm7), b111o7 (Bbo7=Dbo7), ii (Cm7), V (F7) - the "Embraceable You" progression.
-
A typical approach for filling in static harmony is to harmonise every note of a walking bassline. Guitarists do this all the time. Check out John Pizzarelli, he uses plenty of 4-to-the-bar reharmonisations. Bucky and John Pizzarelli Contrasts album is a good place to start.
With one bar of C Maj7, for example, a common reharmonisation is Cmaj7, Dmi7, D#dim, Emi7. Alternative would be C/E for the last chord. Freddie Green type voicings work well for all this stuff.
Two bars? CMaj7 / Dmi7 D#dim|Emi etc
The 'etc' depends on where you need to go next (turnaround or similar reharmonisation of a bass line).
-
Typical harmonisations of bass tones here:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wSF6AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA143&dq="Harmonization+o f+the+new+bass+line"&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAGoVC hMI1e-d5ImSyAIV6CnbCh0B_gUx#v=onepage&q=%22Harmonization %20of%20the%20new%20bass%20line%22&f=false
click 'clear search' and page should display. alternatively, click on page no.Last edited by GuitarGerry; 09-25-2015 at 07:29 AM.
-
True, that would work. Originally Posted by PMB
how many people actually play the original Stella changes? I have yet to meet anyone who does this apart from period stylists.
-
It's a old stride piano thing. +1 on this great all purpose filler. You can break it up into arps too. Works backwards or forwards. Originally Posted by GuitarGerry
-
Pete Bernstein: Originally Posted by christianm77
... 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.
-
Incidentally, Sheryl Bailey posted some nice subs for bars 9-12 of 'Stella' a few years ago that sound great. In Bb, the standard changes: | Bbmaj7 | Em7b5 A7b9 | Dm7 | Bbm7 | are converted to | Gm7#5 Fm7 | Em7b5 A7b9 | Dm7 Cm7 | Bm7b5 Bbm7 |.
-
As a rule of thumb, the stride thing was more 10ths than full chords, but you're right: it's the same principal (harmonising a bass line) and is as old as the hills. Originally Posted by christianm77
Within the context of playing standards, and providing sole accompaniment (or perhaps working with a bass player), it's fine to throw in these subs. Just wanted to point that out to other readers. If you're working in a full rhythm section/big band, then it helps if reharmonisations are agreed in advance. Unless everyone has exceptional ears and can pick up on changes immediately (which does happen), you can end up with quite a few car-crashes by throwing these things in at will.Last edited by GuitarGerry; 09-26-2015 at 04:38 AM.
-
I don't play gigs with those guys. And the only BH students I seem to know in London are guitar players for some reason :-) Originally Posted by PMB
Thanks for flagging up the PB video, need to watch that.
I am well aware of BH's views on Stella :-)
On the other hand, the Jim Hall recording, which is one of my favourites uses the minor ii-V changes, so I see no reason not to use the modern ones if that's what most people play.
It's good to know the originals, of course, and I've pulled them out for a couple of sessions for a play through. Many players are so used to playing the modern changes that they find the old ones mess with their heads... Might be worth rehearsing them I guess...
Re: Darn That Dream - good point.Last edited by christianm77; 09-27-2015 at 06:11 PM.
-
I went to a couple of BH workshops
He only told me to turn down at the end of the second workshop I attended.
Had a lot of fun!
-
Sure, most people are still going to play Em7b5-A7b9 for the opening of 'Stella', Christian. It's just that there's been something of a move away from the '70s tendency, exemplified by the original Real Book, to turn everything into a ii-V. As you say, good to know both versions (particularly in the case of 'Darn That Dream' where the melody itself is altered) when playing in impromptu situations. Likewise, there are plenty of wrong notes in the RB version of 'Donna Lee' but if you're playing the head in unison with someone else unrehearsed, it's probably best to default to the standard text.
Of course, it's easy to get too purist about such things. There's a story that Benny Golson didn't actually write that same Em7-A7 change for the opening of 'Stablemates' but readily adopted it himself once he heard others inserting the sub!
-
Jim Hall recorded his version of Stella in 1957. AFIAK, the ii-V tendency was in full swing long before the RB generation... Originally Posted by PMB
I relearned Donna Lee from the record a few years back (and before that probably the omnibook) so the RB errors are new to me. I thought there were some funny notes in gigs from time to time. I'll bear that in mind. Frankly there's so many problems with that book I'm amazed people learn tunes from the Real Book at all. Who recommends it?
There are so many better fakebooks available now, and of course the best way is to use your ears, though this is hard to do at first.
True re: purism - let other players obsess and observe their shibboleths. I don't care. But I think knowing as many versions of the changes as possible is a really good idea. It's the best way of learning harmony and substitutions, honing your ears, and hanging with as many cats as possible. And I'm always open to someone telling me a different version of the changes and giving it a go...
EDIT: getting back to my original question, I think most of the players in London have yet to get into the anti ii-V trend, but I'm sure that there are some players who do play those changes. Just not many.. yet...Last edited by christianm77; 09-27-2015 at 07:38 PM.
-
Maybe not yet on 'Stella' but I'm definitely hearing more guys playing that diminished change in 'Darn That Dream'. It's cool either way. It's more about being aware that those changes were added later, trying them all out and if you're so inclined, charting how and why they've occurred. I've always liked checking out the history of tunes as there's always a lot to learn along the way concerning historical events, stylistic trends, alternate changes, etc.
I've been playing a lot here over the last couple of years with a great piano player/musical thinker who got me stripping everything back to the basic changes and rebuilding from there. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean playing the bare bones or the urtext. In fact, the process can sometimes lead to another path through the harmony altogether.
Regarding 'Donna Lee', I also lifted it from the record. The Omnibook is pretty much correct but the original RB is way off. Yet that's the version that's become enshrined. No wonder colleges are starting to insist that students learn tunes primarily from recordings. I personally hate playing gigs where everyone has their iPads out for the entire night - the changes are often questionable and no-one's really listening.
-
I personally hate playing gigs where everyone has their iPads out for the entire night - the changes are often questionable and no-one's really listening.
Amen to that! Especially the "no-one's really listening" part
-
I used to be an adamant hardcore 'the records are the textbooks', 'you got ears use them' and 'why does everyone play the wrong chords?' guys. I've kind of mellowed on it all over past year or so. I feel all this stuff is great to check out and it's nice when other people do to, and you can have a chat about what you've discovered and explore it on gigs etc. Originally Posted by PMB
Sometimes people (me included) get on their high horse about it, at which point it ceases to be hip and starts being about the ego. In the worst case that sort of thing can be used as an offensive dominance game, which is always tiresome.
In practice - in terms of learning all the variants of the changes - there are only so many hours a day so you can only check out what you have time to check out, for projects and so on.
At risk of going slightly OT, I'm sure Irez87 would agree when I say therefore a good investment of your time is to work on ear training simply because you can understand what is going on in the music so much faster.
I think that's how the really good musicians do it anyway. Obviously learning songs by ear works your ears too, but you do kind of need to know when you are making mistakes in transcription (happened a lot when I was starting out) so working through things with a teacher or a more experienced musician is invaluable, and structured courses of ear training can be useful too.
It's obvious stuff really I suppose - called being a musician. The ones who get this together early do very well - it always an education being on the bandstand with them. I'm not sure the level to which players who might not be so strong in this area are helped out? (didn't do jazz college...)Last edited by christianm77; 09-27-2015 at 09:28 PM.
-
I think we're pretty much in agreement, Christian particularly about the arrogance factor. The Golson anecdote illustrates that we can sometimes be presumptuous about the composer's intentions. I also didn't go to 'jazz college' although I studied modern classical composition at the conservatorium here in Sydney and only know about current trends at jazz schools via some of the younger guys on gigs. My ears were always sharp from transcribing at a young age (mostly pop songs early on as songbooks were often terrible piano/vocal reductions with wrong chords) but the main reason I prefer to rely on my ears these days is that I have an eidetic memory. If I learn a tune from a fakebook, I'll generally see a 'snapshot' of that page with all the chords for years later. That might sound useful but it's often a real hindrance when having to transpose for singers or play different subs.
Anyway, that's enough hijacking from me. Time to get back to the I chord!
-
I'm sure if we stick around for long enough we can find some uncommon ground.:-) Originally Posted by PMB
I think the classical cats get some great input on ear training. I've learned much more about this stuff from talking to classically trained musicians (such my wife.) Sounds like you learned jazz the old fashioned way... It does work!
I know exactly what you mean about 'seeing the page' its a hinderance. If you can hear the tune and the progression in your head, much harder to forget a tune.
Finally, regarding changes, there's a sort of an interesting grey area regarding the composer's intent and how this is relevant to jazz performance. As standards often originate outside of the jazz tradition, there's a question hanging over how much we adapt the changes to improvise on them. This happens even with music from within 'jazz' - many Duke Ellington standards, and how much of the harmony is simplified in most performances.
I would argue that as jazz is an oral tradition, the composers original intention is likely much less important than what jazz musicians have done with it since... For jazz compositions this can lead to issues with the composer being 'too present' - it's hard to get away from the Wayne recordings of Wayne tunes, for example.
From a teaching point of view, it seems to me that many teachers on jazz programmes are keen to teach the basics, but many students lack the patience or the interest. That said there are quite a few young players now who are keen to learn about the older music and the basics, and some of them are frustrated by the lack of teaching in this area at the London colleges.Last edited by christianm77; 09-28-2015 at 06:51 AM.
-
There are many methods... organized approaches for creating harmonic movement. But that's the point... the approach being used has organization.
When you create harmonic motion... it should have a tonal reference(s). Or whatever you choose, but when you just play what you feel or can come up with... you may not hear it but there are physical results... and there are real differences. Reasons why some players sound better or worse. Just as we create grooves, lock into the pocket etc... harmonic motion and the accent patterns of that harmonic motion... the harmonic rhythm... is just as important as the rhythmic accent pattern.
The advantages of II V's are they can have a few tonal references going on simultaneously, they're fairly harmonically simple, and our ears have been trained to hear them. (they have tonal references).
So the basic concept when creating harmonic movement is to have a macro plan... the tune your playing has a basic harmonic rhythm... there is a basic harmonic "Form" that establishes function, function is the harmonic organization that creates movement... the motor behind harmonic movement.
So that is your basic reference... the next step is to create micro levels of this same harmonic approach. Within the tune, smaller sections of the tune also have tonal targets and references. What generally happens is the harmonic approach reference from the tune is used to create new micro relationships and then developed. What we as jazz players generally do is just that... we create relationships within the tune and develop them all with reference to the basic harmonic rhythmic of the tune.
We're talking about comping now... but the same concept applied to soloing.
So the next step... is to become aware of Chord Patterns.... which can be used like one chord. So instead of simply adding an approach, passing, cycles, sequential, sub... whatever type of chord, you use established chord patterns, like II V's, I VI II V, I bVII bVI V, I bIII bVI bII, etc... basically any pattern of chords used within established jazz tunes.
Those patterns, Chord Patterns, generally root motion patterns are then adapted to reference the Tune your playing, the tonal reference(s) of the tune your performing. Your not reharmonizing the tune or changing the tonal references, your creating relationships which still have reference to the tune.
As you develop these skills you also develop more levels of usage of chord patterns.... basically become able to develop the tonal references within the actual chord patterns, the chords of the chord patterns, and still keep the tune as reference.
So really... who just plays the same changes over and over, just as when your soloing, comping usually involves improve.
The problem is generally most don't know how to comp, let alone improve while comping.
Generally I use lead lines or the lead notes of the chord patterns I'm playing and then develop the harmony below that lead line. The lead line can keep a tonal reference going on while I develop the harmony, somewhat like how a melody implies harmony.
Another point is how melody notes or improve notes vertically line up with chords. They don't need to all line up diatonic, actually or personally it can get really vanilla when they do... Generally there is organization of this concept, usually relating to the harmonic rhythm... the implied strong/ weak rhythmic pattern which is usually implied from the style of music being performed. They're not all the same.
EDS... getting into examples... with stella, post an example of style or how your hearing the tune played and I'll give you a few examples of how I might create harmonic motion for the last two bars and how I would relate to tune in a macro level as well as within the tune after playing through the head etc...
-
Nice to hear from you, Reg :-)
Reply With Quote
escow.com
Today, 07:56 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos