-
11-13-2015, 01:39 PM #51destinytot GuestHow about helping out with a quick video?
Originally Posted by targuit
-
11-13-2015 01:39 PM
-
I believe Roni is another former BH student, but in long run the Major 6 Diminished scale is the same so studying and experimenting with it should reveal the same answers. They're all different paths to the same location. Originally Posted by Hupia
-
Targuit, I used to also think it was much ado about nothing until I spent some serious time looking at Barry Harris' concepts. It is much more than what you outline above. Add in concepts like "borrowing" and you have a harmonic treasure trove that never gets old and provides tons of movement. Ymmv but I have been playing a long time and found this method to be the best thing to liberate you from harmonic clichés. Originally Posted by targuit
-
AlainJazz
Could you make a video explain and showing some concepts..I to have the Roni BenHUR DVD
thx
Ken
-
I already proposed a video theme - let's all decide on a song that fits the criteria (harmonic movement, min6's or if you prefer as I do diminished chords and flat fifths) to illustrate so-called 'chord harmonic movement' and submit our respective interpretations. I think of it as voice leading, and I need no method book or Sacred Secret Harmonic theories from Planet Galactica to teach me to reproduce the necessary music. I use me ears. I transcribe. Note-for-note if you want. When I play a standard that has the requisite chord movement, I think about the bass line. My subconscious provides the correct harmony. Translation - if you can play 98% of the jazz repertoire by ear, why do you need to muddle your brain with 'theoretical mush'? Originally Posted by destinytot
It is like CST - for kids, not adults musically speaking. "Daddy, can I use a flat fifth here or not, and what mode should I chant while playing?" "Use your ears, Junior. If it sounds like crap, probably you shouldn't do it." Joe Pass - "Don't ask me about modes...I don't know anything." Poor, Joe. If he only knew how inadequate he was....
On the other hand, if you wish to send me lots of money, I will come up with a theoretical treatise. Or better yet, advise you to devote the next decade of your life to studying Van Eps method book. Hope you live long enough.....
Anyway, I was thinking about songs that have 'chordal movement' and I decided it was practically all of them. Which did not help in narrowing potential songs for demonstration purposes. Louie, Louie .... Gloria... I'll come up with a list. How about Two for the Road? Love Mancini.
Last edited by targuit; 11-13-2015 at 03:10 PM.
-
Found this web page which gives some interesting details and a PDF about the Barry Harris stuff:
Spiced Up Comping Using the Barry Harris Harmonic Method
-
That's cool, everyone can make videos showing different ways they use the BH concept.
-
Ok, so I plead my ignorance - what is borrowing? Let me guess - pretending your in another key, like the relative minor or.... calling the same chord a different name to confuse the rubes?
-
Buddist brain buster - if you can play this song arrangement, do you need to study Barry Harris?
Chamacojesus plays the hell out of this song. I play this arrangement as well. Is there enough movement in the chords?
-
what's "voice leading"? You talk theory yourself and insult other people for talking about theory. Transcription and ears are a part, but there's a way that musicians talk about playing music. Stop trolling, let people talk about what they want to talk about. Originally Posted by targuit
Start your own "It's just easy and natural for me" thread. Meanwhile, we're fortunate to have some real players talking this stuff here.
-
11-13-2015, 03:55 PM #61destinytot GuestNah! That's not it at all. Originally Posted by targuit
I already proposed a video theme - let's all decide on a song that fits the criteria (harmonic movement, min6's or if you prefer as I do diminished chords and flat fifths) to illustrate so-called 'chord harmonic movement' and submit our respective interpretations. I think of it as voice leading, and I need no method book or Sacred Secret Harmonic theories from Planet Galactica to teach me to reproduce the necessary music. I use me ears. I transcribe. Note-for-note if you want. When I play a standard that has the requisite chord movement, I think about the bass line. My subconscious provides the correct harmony. Translation - if you can play 98% of the jazz repertoire by ear, why do you need to muddle your brain with 'theoretical mush'?
It is like CST - for kids, not adults musically speaking. "Daddy, can I use a flat fifth here or not, and what mode should I chant while playing?" "Use your ears, Junior. If it sounds like crap, probably you shouldn't do it." Joe Pass - "Don't ask me about modes...I don't know anything." Poor, Joe. If he only knew how inadequate he was....
On the other hand, if you wish to send me lots of money, I will come up with a theoretical treatise. Or better yet, advise you to devote the next decade of your life to studying Van Eps method book. Hope you live long enough.....
Anyway, I was thinking about songs that have 'chordal movement' and I decided it was practically all of them. Which did not help in narrowing potential songs for demonstration purposes. Louie, Louie .... Gloria... I'll come up with a list. How about Two for the Road? Love Mancini.
Thank you, Peggy Lee:
-
Here's another beautiful interpretation of Morricone's Cinema Paradiso - Love Theme by another talented guitarist. Note the F#m7b5 or the Ebm6 and the C#dim 7 or...I don't know what Barry would call it . Anyway, pick the song you want. I play this one, too. So nice...
Beautiful touch, tone, and yes, chord movement here. Theorize if you like - I prefer to play.
Last edited by targuit; 11-13-2015 at 04:09 PM.
-
11-13-2015, 04:05 PM #63destinytot GuestHow about The Shadow of Your Smile? Originally Posted by targuit
-
Oh, Matt! Just having a little fun! Come on! This stuff isn't brain surgery - just good music. My point is that if your ear hears the voice leading and you can play it, the theory is superfluous. In point of fact, when I notate transcriptions with my old Sibelius G7 software and then have the software analyze the notation for the chords, it always turns all my m7b5's into m6's which pisses me off and I have to manually change them. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
And what do you mean "what's voice leading?" I thought you were a music teacher. Pick a song you like and we'll compare arrangements and videos. Actually that is what the OP requested. But as far as explaining it, here's mine - it sounds good with good voice leading. Or if you want, I'll send you a transcription. Mine.
-
I haven't really looked into the Barry Harris stuff yet, but it seems to me that Wes Montgomery often harmonised his chord solos with diminished chords on the passing notes or 'weak' notes. So it seems to me that Barry's approach is not far removed from this. If it was good enough for Wes, I am interested!
-
Ah! Thanks for clarifying, docbop. Happy to learn I wasn't way off the mark :-) Originally Posted by docbop
Last edited by Hupia; 11-13-2015 at 04:29 PM. Reason: added quote being replied to
-
11-13-2015, 04:24 PM #67destinytot GuestThe OP specifically mentions 'creating' chord movement. Originally Posted by targuit
-
Yes, but no one answers, "Yes, I play this arrangement, too. And I "create" the chord movement." (Though I would credit the composer.) I'm just joshing with you, but some take this too seriously. I love Barry Harris. But I love his playing most of all.
I am well aware that not everyone plays at a level that they can instantly sit down and play the two songs I posted from Mancini and Morricone. But if you do and understand the chord movement created, do you really need to spend precious time studying the concept? Seriously, this is a question.
For those who are not yet capable of playing the song "Se" - the love theme by Morricone in Cinema Paradiso - and transposing it instantly into various keys, then studying Barry Harris's tome may be worth the time you devote.
In the time from my last post, I had a discussion with my wife, made a doppio espresso, and ran through Se by ear on my classical guitar in several keys to choose a good one for vocal as well (Dm or Em for me), though I also liked C#m for purely instrumental. Edit: I just played through Josh Groban's version in Fmin on the piano along with his video on YT. Nice guitar and vocal key as well.
Let's see - last weekend I recorded The Girl From Ipanema - is that enough chord movement? If not, I'll record Se this weekend and try to get it up on YouTube on my channel. I also recorded Two For The Road a few weeks ago. I'd like to do it just as solo guitar and vocal this weekend.
I nearly had a heart attack last Friday when I tried to post wav. files of a recording for one of Irez' other threads to Dropbox (not intuitive to me in terms of file sharing) and instead found my son's entire i-Tunes uploading instead. I actually cancelled the account immediately. So this not so tech savvy guy has to do it the "old fashioned way" - on YouTube.
Anyway, Matt, sorry if my posts rubbed you the wrong way metaphorically. These songs are really good examples of Chord movement in my "humble" opinion. Since I've posted these songs, why don't we analyze on analytically if you like?Last edited by targuit; 11-13-2015 at 05:09 PM.
-
So do any of you "REAL PLAYERS" do these tunes, Matt? You know, that is not a nice thing to say.... I'd like to hear one or two of the "REAL PLAYERS" post as well. I know that Grahambop can likely can play this stuff with his eyes closed. Actually that's how I like to play... Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
-
I don't think the Barry Harris thing is so much about doing a chord melody or arrangement of a tune. For that I would probably stick largely to the chords 'as given' for that tune (with suitable extensions or voicings as required, to support the melody).
I believe it is more about how to make your comping more interesting. Suppose you were playing a tune where you had to comp 2 bars of C major behind someone else's solo. (Green Dolphin Street, perhaps?) I think Barry is giving some methods of creating melodic lines with chords during those 2 bars to make your comping more musical. But I haven't studied it yet, so that's just my initial take on it.
I do tend to play a lot by 'ear and instinct', but I also like to investigate ideas like this sometimes.
-
This has been my understanding as well, although most of my exposure to the concept has been from reading this thread. Originally Posted by grahambop
I think there's been a misunderstanding as to what "creating chord movement" refers to in this thread.
-
No. The concept of "borrowing" is in a nutshell using notes from adjacent diminished chords. You can mix and match in almost endless combinations as long as you know your chord inversions really well. This brings out voicings that you usually wouldn't think of. You can also construct any chord from a m6 plus borrowed notes. Maj7, augmented, etc. they are all variations of m6 if you think about it as "borrowing" notes from other chords. Originally Posted by targuit
Similarly you can come up with all kinds of interesting Dom 7 chords by starting from a diminished chord and "borrowing" from adjacent m6 chords. What ends up happening is that you stop seeing tunes in terms of specific chords and instead see it as movement within a chord scale.
-
Watched one of your vids on youtube, very nice improv!! Originally Posted by grahambop
Ken
-
Me doing quick Barry Harris run
-
That wasn't what I was saying. No one's stopping you from posting your playing in any thread. My point was that there are guys who can play this stuff AND think it's worth talking about. Jordan, Christian, Reg, Graham, certainly not me....talk about harmonic and other musical concepts AND demonstrate that they can play. Originally Posted by targuit
You repeatedly imply that is somehow beneath you and demean the conversation itself. My point is: if reg et al think these conversations are worth having, who am I to say otherwise. I don't reply to about 99.9% of all threads. Jay, why do you waste your time blowing up threads with your thoughts that these things just aren't that important?
If I went to the gear forums and implied that those guys should PRACTICE and not worry so much about amp settings, might someone call that trolling? And would they have a point?Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 11-13-2015 at 08:32 PM.
-
Alain - that is interesting, but some of us do that "naturally" because we know how to play around the chord forms and have ears to add sharps and flats to diminished chords or any chord form. When do you play an A7aug? When it sounds right, not according to some 'formula'. It even annoys me to talk about "learning chord inversions". You don't cycle through your mental library of inversions when you are playing a tune - you play what you hear or what is written. You might work on a concept in the woodshed, but not on stage or in a recording situation.
I know this is hard for some to grok, but I don't need "permission" or a research paper to play tunes like Two For the Road or myriad other standards. It just is not necessary once you get to a certain level. Sure, talking about theory is interesting - to a point. When I see people agonizing over "note pools" or modal music or hear advice like "play Dorian over this dominant chord", my eyes glaze over. Or to put it another way - reading about how to use diminished chords, minor flat fifths or if you prefer min sixths can be enlightening to those who don't know how to use their ears. If you know this stuff to the point that you don't even think about it anymore, it becomes mental masturbation.
Theory won't get you laid or get applause.Last edited by targuit; 11-13-2015 at 08:28 PM.
-
Just a question for you, Matt. Two For the Road - do you play that tune? If someone called it with a singer and you had to transpose the key, can you play it? I suspect that you can. I don't really care a fig if people want to spend their time reading tomes that propose to teach you harmony. Fine. You want to waste years of your life studying Van Eps tomes? Be my guest.
My comment was that those who aspire to learn to play well should learn to reproduce what is written or what they hear. If you cannot hear the difference between a Ddim7 or a Dm7b5, reading a book is not enough. I don't know - I just don't need formulas or permission to play certain note pools - I'm beyond that. There are only twelve damn notes in the scale of an octave. And I know how to play these tunes. No, I'm not Charlie Parker and I don't give a shit to emulate a wasted drug addict. Too bad.
I also suggested that we satisfy the OP by providing our versions of certain specific tunes that illustrate the concept of using these harmonic devices. I was joking that this harmonic material is present in nearly every jazz standard I can think of. These are not 'esoteric' mysterious harmonic devices. I posted a couple of vids off YT that demonstrate the concept. And I play those tunes in much the same way. WHY!?? Because that's how the damn songs were written, long before Barry Harris wrote his book. How did those pioneer jazz players ever figure this stuff out? Beats me....
-
Originally Posted by targuit
This guys a real DB...Some of us don't have 8 fucking hours a day to figure shit out...get it!!!!!
-
Anyway, I would like to give my condolences to the nation of France and the Parisians who have suffered such grievous losses today. We talk about music here. In Paris people are bleeding or dying of their wounds. Important to maintain some perspective on what is truly important.
In any case, I will not obstruct or disrupt any further discussion of the subject of this thread. I have better things to do. Over and out.
-
Some of us figured it out a long time ago. And we don't need to use profanity or attack others for their opinions. I just retired from the practice of medicine, pal. What do you do for a living? Or are you living in your parents' basement? Originally Posted by guitarplayer007
-
Targuit, you are all bluff and bluster. Many of the greats sought out mathematical relationships to further their knowledge and horizons. People need to find their own way, and it is stupid to dismiss a very valuable way of learning. The way you talk you should be the greatest that ever picked up an instrument, but I can assure you, you are not.
"All musicians are subconsciously mathematicians" Thelonious Monk.Last edited by plasticpigeon; 11-13-2015 at 09:20 PM.
-
11-13-2015, 09:07 PM #82destinytot GuestGet help. Originally Posted by targuit
-
Your so full of yourself...Just fing leave!!!!!!!!!! Originally Posted by targuit
-
I practice medicine whoopy fucking doo, you just showed how pathetic you are with low self esteem to make such a comment... Dr or not your a moron Originally Posted by guitarplayer007
-
Guys, we have lost the thread here. We could talk about where and why (-let's call that Option A) or get back to the discussion of creating chord movement in standards (let's call that Option B). I prefer Option B. Who's with me?
-
I'm not doing the playing challenge again, Jay. We've done that. What I posted at the time illustrated that I'm exactly who I say I am ,an amateur. I'm not the one claiming to be a great player, but that's beside the point.
First of all, it's also beside the point as to whether you can play anything. We're talking about how OTHER people might learn something . Originally Posted by targuit
Second, no one ever said that merely READING a book would give knowledge. But what about working through the material? You, yourself, talk about the great value of reading through large amounts of music in your day . What's the difference?
You could argue that simply playing through music is somehow more efficient than systematically playing through music which introduces specific theoretical concepts or devices, but that's semantics really . It's a pretty fine point to argue that those are any different.
There are only 12 notes you say . But they're not arbitrarily arranged in real music. There's organization to all of it . Are you against all theory books or just Barry Harris? Still don't understand what your specific beef with him is.
The pioneer jazz players learned by playing with others , watching mentors fingers and asking questions , listening to recordings. Did they study Mickey Baker or Barry Harris? Did they watch DVDs? They certainly weren't on the jazz forum talking about this stuff . Is all of that illegitimate because it didn't exist back then? Originally Posted by targuit
Besides which, Barry Harris is a jazz musician . If Wes Montgomery were in front of you , you'd be an idiot not to ask him some questions and seek help on anything you could think of to ask him. If you could get him to write down a book's worth of material or make a DVD, would that material be useless because he didn't use the same?
The truth is you don't "hear" ANYTHING as a musician that you didn't pick up from somewhere else. you didn't get that hearing ability from just looking at the notes on paper or thinking about them. How is the process of internalizing material from a book like this any different? Eventually you're not thinking about it. Right? The same thing really.
Barry Harris's books aren't any more "magical" than all the sheet music you read over the years or wherever you learned whatever theory you know. I don't see how it's any less valid.
Ironically, you sound like one of those people that bitch that you can't learn anything about jazz from reading music. It's just a different take on it.
Sorry to offend in my earlier post. I'll leave you with it.Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 11-13-2015 at 10:27 PM.
-
Targuit, you are absolutely right. Ears ARE the key and many of us do do similar "borrowing" naturally. However, this does provide a framework for looking at the neck that is imho useful for more complex harmony. I have been doing what you described for 30 years and it works great. Usually, I would "borrow" one note, maybe 2 on rare occasions and mostly on the top voices. Borrow 3 voices and mix and match from above and below and I am fairly certain that very few people do this spontaneously by ear only without some kind of frame of reference. More likely, theta are chord shapes and voicings they've practiced. When I'm comping, I come up with voicings that I have not specifically practiced. I am moving the notes by ear, but having the framework gives me a base to play within. Originally Posted by targuit
-
Jay you always get all steamed up when people discuss theory or books. Are they really so bad? Doesn't medicine have some theory and books in it? Originally Posted by targuit
Anyway the OP did ask specifically for a book recommendation.
-
The main issue with this thread is everyone is not talking about the same thing.
Targuit, the reason you're being misunderstood is you're talking about harmonic movement within the whole progression. Most of us are talking about movement on a single chord. In other words how to fill up two bars worth of a Cmaj7, by giving it some movement. I remember you getting beaten on in the thread about melodic minor modes because you didn't understand those either. Long story short, it would benefit all of us to remember nobody knows everything. The day you stop investigating these new possibilities is the day you stop growing as a player.
-
Originally Posted by guitarplayer007
Ok, this is a good start, but..... Think of it as the finish. If you're playing a ii v i, you could use (part of that) for the I chord.
Now, you need to figure out the minor (ii) and dominant (v) movements.
I would suggest just getting the minor movement going to start. So...
Start on d minor (bh calls it f6), you have four beats. On the first three, play dm7, then up to c#dim, then the next dmin7 for two beats. That takes care of the ii chord.
now, I would just play a single v chord sub to get it in your ear. So the chart says play a g7, we want to sub that with Abmin6 (I prefer because of my training to think min7b5 off the b7 of a dominant chord, fmin7b5). That should get the sound of the dominant in your ear.
last you resolve it to the I chord. If you have two bars of Cmaj7, lets fill up the first 5 (of 8) beats. Take the first five chords of your major "movement".... C, Ddim, C, Ddim, C.
to sum up....
dm7 ....c#dim ....dm7...dm7........fmin7b5 ///..... C..Ddim...C...Ddim....C
hope that helps. P.s. You may want to change that first correct c6 voicing to the easier cmaj7 cgbe. It's less "correct" but easier to grab clean, especially in certain places on the neck. Also it's just a nice sound.
-
Perhaps I did not understand. I thought the issue was 'creating chord movement' and what books might help. Someone suggested Barry Harris. I like his music and his persona,and though I have never read his book, I have listened to his "tutorials" on YT. Quite stimulating. While I cannot knowledgably discuss his thesis on minor sixth harmony since I have not read his book, I imagine it has to do with using minor seventh flat fifths and diminished chords (often as Graham noted on the 'weak' beats) to connect the basic harmony as transitional chords. To create 'chord movement' as per the OP.
The thing is that I play and utilize this type of harmonic device without thinking about it as I play jazz standards. Over the past couple of days I've been "thinking about" these devices which I normally just play naturally because I hear it as voice leading. Have I always been knowledgeable and proficient at using these devices? Of course not. I learned this as part of my 'education' in jazz standard playing. It is in the Real Book on nearly every standard published. I have a hard time finding a jazz standard that does not employ these harmonic devices. Learning the standards over the years it has simply become very 'normal' to play in this fashion. If I 'think about' these devices at all, it is terms of voice leading. But most of the time I just hear it and play it.
It is nearly dawn. I have played through my daily practice. Tonight I played through several Jobim songs. Virtually all of them used these devices. Then I played along with a solo pianist, Harold Mabern. Ditto. And the last thing I worked on was my transcription of You Don't Know What Love Is, which I am going to record tomorrow. Ditto. You really cannot play jazz standards without employing these harmonic devices. They are that fundamental to modern music and this genre.
How do you explain to someone unfamiliar with these devices how they work? I suggest by example. Listen to the song. Hear this phrase - this is where you transition from this chord to the next via this diminished minor seventh chord. Simple. Hear it a few hundred times, you will likely understand it. If you feel the need to spend money to assimilate it, be my guest. Maybe a teacher would help. But develop your ears. Jazz is not played with cowboy chords alone.
To respond to Vintagelove - you should link me to where I "don't understand melodic minor", as I understood melodic minor when I was twelve years old some time ago unfortunately. I don't even think about it because I don't need to - I hear it. I play it. Like Joe Pass, I could not give a crap about modes beyond their theoretical and historical significance. I don't need to. I think the only type of harmony or theory that I really need to work on would be quartal harmony. I also play piano and McCoy Tyner is among my favorites. But, I don't specialize in playing quartal harmony routinely on guitar, though I certainly understand it. I hear it.
As far as trying to use Barry Harris' concepts to play two bars over a single chord, I am stumped. Good thing I don't need the theory to figure out what to play. I do like to discuss theory, but more in relation to concrete songs. Frankly, it's like the difference between daydreaming about sex and actually engaging in sex with a real (hot) woman. I prefer the later.
Graham - "Jay you always get all steamed up when people discuss theory or books. Are they really so bad? Doesn't medicine have some theory and books in it?"
Oh, yes! Lots of books that take years to read. But tell me one thing. If you are seriously ill and go to a hospital to seek treatment, would you rather see the first year resident who just started his internship or the ED attending with a touch of gray hair? Easy question, isn't it?
-
Vintage, I am actually talking about harmonic movement in general. Ie not just creating movement in a static chord. I see the latter as just a sub category of the former. Originally Posted by vintagelove
Targuit, for what it's worth, anyone who knows me would tell you that I am the least theory-oriented musician they know. I know only enough theory as I need to make the music I want to. I am sure you could stump me on the easiest theory questions. I play 99,5% by ear. Nevertheless, everyone needs a framework. Barry Harris' framework is as good as any and I've found it to be useful. I don't want to convince anyone that this is the only way to go because it's not. I learn music almost exclusively by learning tunes. I have never had a book that I learned anything useful from. The Alan Kingstone book is the only useful book on guitar I've ever bought. I only bought it out of curiosity and it provides everything the OP is trying to do. I think investing time in the ideas is worthwhile.
Guitarplayer007 I currently don't have a good way to record a video but feel free to pm with any questions and I'll try to help or give you examples.
-
This thread is ruined. What a shame.
-
Take heart. The thread shall find itself back on track and rolling right along over the weekend. How do I know this? I don't. But there are more people who want to talk about the main topic than don't, so I think we should find our way back to it. Originally Posted by plasticpigeon
-
Thanks AlainJazz Originally Posted by AlainJazz
Ken
-
Thanks very much Ken. Originally Posted by guitarplayer007
And thanks for starting this thread - it's got me seriously checking out this Barry Harris thing, which I didn't know much about before.
-
Your welcome Grahambop
Yeah I'm going to devote time to the Barry Harris book, but still my main focus for next 12 months is Richie Zellons Improv course.
Ken
-
Just a brief addition for those who love jazz and wish to learn from a master - Body and Soul with streaming piano notation and excellent commentary and annotations by Doug McKenzie, a 'retired' jazz professor in Australia.
One of these days I will have to read the material suggested in this thread. I don't discount the value of book learning. But the nitty gritty of dots on the page and your ears will teach you faster than any other approach. This is for those who are serious about music and jazz. Doug is a virtual wealth of information, music files, sheet music, and brilliant playing who so very generously offers his expertise on YouTube. I hope you will enjoy the real deal - a "real player", as Matt would suggest.
I'm posting this so those who read notation can learn about 'chord movement' and the use of minor 6ths, voice leading, and improvisation. Doug records these priceless recordings and videos as improvisations off simple lead sheets. Fabulous musicianship. For those who are serious, this provides the requisite sheet music to have an intelligent discussion even measure by measure.
Last edited by targuit; 11-14-2015 at 12:38 PM.
-
I don't suppose there's any way to convey how insulting and condescending your posts are on this kind of thing. Originally Posted by targuit
But since we're arbitrarily spewing thoughts about things we haven't even bothered to look at....
#########################
I hereby pronounce the INTRODUCTION to Kingstone's Barry Harris book to be 100 TIMES MORE VALUABLE to jazz musicians than ALL of the collected YouTube videos of your guy put together.
I have done this without having watched ANY part of your video. I really don't have to. My way is just quantifiable better. And I know this by sheet force of my magical musical powers of discernment. (Removes wizard hat.)
That is all. Discussion over.Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 11-14-2015 at 02:59 PM.
-
i don't even think of myself as a "Barry Harris guy" but i feel like i have to clear up some misconceptions in this thread
you can absolutely do chord melodies with this approach, and you can come up with some very cool things Originally Posted by grahambop
later this weekend, i'll try to post a video demonstrating some of that
1. Barry Harris never wrote a book. Alan Kingstone wrote a book based on his ideas, and that's what people are referring to Originally Posted by targuit
But Barry has never written anything. he gives weekly workshops in NYC, and i strongly suggest anyone go if they ever get the chance. it's quite a trip. it's in a community center gym, and the students range from beginners all the way up to first call, top tier players.
nothing is written out. Barry either demonstrates something on the piano, or just verbally tells you to play something. a lot of it is done by ear. it's quite demanding, and you have to stay on your toes the whole time.
2. the basics of his ideas are standard harmonic devices that arrangers have been using for years. the more advanced applications can help you come up with harmonic ideas that aren't in any standard (but could definitely be used in standards if you wanted).
how did jazz pioneers figure this stuff out? a variety of ways, including but not limited to theory. Barry taught Charles McPherson and Yusef Lateef, so it certainly worked for some people
again, this is "eh, close, but..." Originally Posted by targuit
you're missing the real good parts, and that's a disservice to it.
let me be clear: i don't consider myself a "Barry Harris acolyte." i've been to a number of his workshops, and really enjoyed them and got a ton out of them, but i don't consider him my "guru" by any means.
when i'm improvising, comping, arranging, or composing, i use a wide range of ideas and concepts that i've picked up over the years. Barry's ideas are just one thing i use out of many
what i do like about them is that they really encourage an exploratory, playful approach. it really is not overly theoretical at all, and it's baffling to me that they're being construed that way. it's not a "write out a telephone book full of every option" method. it's about trying different things and finding what you like.
you can use the method to find a bunch of things you already know and like. for some of those things, Barry's approach would be too cumbersome, and it might be easier to think of it another way. but at the same time, it makes you think in a different way and helps me find things that i never would have found otherwise
Reply With Quote
Cannonball Adderley play along - Sack of Woe
Yesterday, 10:59 PM in Improvisation