Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Posts 101 to 150 of 771
  1. #101

    User Info Menu

    I am not obstructing the discourse on books written to explain Barry Harris' methodology. I offer no criticism of Barry Harris. As Matt likes to say, he is a 'real player'. I admit that I have not read the tome in question regarding this methodology. What I did respond to is the OP's desire to learn how to create chord movement in standards. By putting up a video by a master musician who provides more info in one of his videos than most teachers in a month.

    I would hope that Mark as moderator would take note of the difference between discussion of topics and personal attacks.

    As an aside, I am creating a transcription of Se, a song composed by Ennio and Andrea Morricone for the film Cinema Paradiso. And I will offer to e-mail this to anyone who can read notation and would like to play this beautiful piece. Why? Because it demonstrates some of the concepts discussed here. Voice leading. The use of m7b5ths and diminished chords as transitions for chord movement.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    I admit that I have not read the tome in question regarding this methodology.
    ok
    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    What I did respond to is the OP's desire to learn how to create chord movement in standards.
    ... but that kind of makes it sound like you WEREN'T openly mocking ANYONE who would seek such information from any book (basically everyone else actually participating) when that information could much more easily be gotten from playing through hundreds of tunes over decades.

    Anyway, it's cool of you to actually offer input into the thread at this point. It shows much more much good will than sniping from the sidelines does. I congratulate you, even if you have to back pedal and do a little revisionist whatty whatty to get there. It's very big of you, brother. Good job.

  4. #103

    User Info Menu

    Matt, I don't seek conflict. My opinions can be strongly expressed but are not intended to mock anyone. I think we all understand music depending on where we are in our journey. I don't spend much time these days trying to learn the basics so much as trying to refine the finished product and even to create my own. I tend to take for granted certain skills developed over a long time (over fifty years) such as reading notation fluently, playing by ear. I just wish I had these skills when I was twenty, and I was pretty damn good at that age. It's getting late in the game, so I'm impatient. I'm hearing footsteps...life is over so quickly. Like sand through the hour glass - a non-sequitur reference to an old daytime soap.

    Life is funny. Doug McKenzie, the Australian pianist / educator who truly has gifted his expertise via YouTube to the world, remarked that one motivation was to pass on his knowledge to another generation of people like us crazy enough to devote years of their life to pursing the passion of playing jazz. I understand that - I wanted to teach my son everything I know, like a legacy. He is eighteen and gifted with talent and remarkable intelligence - he is the highest ranked male student in his high school over the past three years and now into his senior year. But sadly he is not the least bit interested in playing music. For someone who can not live without music that is hard to comprehend. But each of us has his journey to make.

  5. #104

    User Info Menu

    I went out to buy some beer today. I like Gosser, an Austrian lager. I took my motorcycle, a good model that took me to the Appalachian’s and out to the Bay of Fundy this past summer. There aren’t many days left in the motorcycle season and it was nice to get out again today. I diverted my route a bit south of Danforth Avenue in Toronto where I live just to enjoy the day and as I headed west I noticed a laneway that I’d not explored before and as is my wont I headed down it not knowing if I’d get through or have to head back. I’ve been a map-reader most of my life but have really enjoyed my new GPS unit and it showed a route to the right at the seeming dead end. I turned sharp right at minimum speed and as I tentatively accelerated through the corner my rear wheel slipped on some wet leaves, the bike sliding as if on ice. Luckily I am still responsive enough that I grabbed the clutch and got my right leg down before I dropped my 450 pound bike, 14 beer and my old body to the ground. My heart raced. I got home and the beer is chilled. I can’t wait until next bike season.

    Alan

  6. #105

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    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.

    it is obviously true that the music is really easy to play for people who have mastered it - my records have no other sorts of musicians playing on them!!!

    but to labour this sort of point on this sort of forum really strikes me as annoying in the extreme. do a video of yourself doing all these wonderful things so us morons can enjoy just how wonderful you are. this is the most objectionable post i've read on a forum full of objectionable posts.

    but i'm sure you're one hell of a player

  7. #106

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Groyniad
    it is obviously true that the music is really easy to play for people who have mastered it - my records have no other sorts of musicians playing on them!!!

    but to labour this sort of point on this sort of forum really strikes me as annoying in the extreme. do a video of yourself doing all these wonderful things so us morons can enjoy just how wonderful you are. this is the most objectionable post i've read on a forum full of objectionable posts.

    but i'm sure you're one hell of a player

    I agree, though I'm not asking for a video of targuit's playing.

  8. #107

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Groyniad
    it is obviously true that the music is really easy to play for people who have mastered it - my records have no other sorts of musicians playing on them!!!

    but to labour this sort of point on this sort of forum really strikes me as annoying in the extreme. do a video of yourself doing all these wonderful things so us morons can enjoy just how wonderful you are. this is the most objectionable post i've read on a forum full of objectionable posts.

    but i'm sure you're one hell of a player
    Just watch here:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRq...3PM0owaH0hjyGg

  9. #108

    User Info Menu

    all the references to the barry harris stuff risk implying that barry harris came up with all this harmonic machinery

    of course he didn't

    at most he discovered it - in the music - where it lives

    you don' t need barry harris to hear it in the music or to discover it there - or even to tease out all the work it does in the music

    so you don't need any formal musical study to get to this stuff. you can just find it at work in the music with your ears etc. etc.

    ---

    and my annoyance with the tone of Ts post has NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO with his musical ability. i have no idea whether he's a fraud or a superstar - and that does not matter to me at all. (except - maybe - that the better he is the more sensitive he ought to be to 'ordinary' or student players.)

    (the reason this is so is that the better you are, the more esteem you are held in (roughly), and that means that the insensitivity of really able players will do more damage.)

    there's a vibe of mutual support on here that is a good thing - and it endures despite the fact that there are some very very able players here and some beginners. it will not continue to endure in the face of these sorts of post.

  10. #109

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by destinytot
    So, as far as I'm concerned, that particular member's comments - er - 'will not stand'.

  11. #110
    destinytot Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    As 'Dr Niles Crane' frequently says to his brother in TV's Frasier, "You know me so well."

    Speaking of insult, I had a gig with an organ trio at a bistro musical last night. That title probably doesn't require much explanation, except perhaps the bistro part - which implies that they serve food (from the Russian for 'quick').

    Well, the gig was fine, but we won't be returning. The owner paid us - then immediately told us to go and pay at the counter for our meals and drinks. We'd consumed very little, but the bill was huge.

    But we paid it (not that we had much choice), as we decided that there was probably more to the situation than meets the eye. I'm pleased to report that were no 'bowling balls at dawn':

  12. #111

    User Info Menu

    Oh, dear! I apologize for offending anyone inadvertently. I certainly did not call anyone a "moron" or deride them for lack of ability. I have been playing since I was twelve and that was more than fifty years ago, so I do have experience. I worked for many years as a physician, just 'retiring' at the end of September, but I am deeply engaged in copying medical records for patient transfers, so I have not been able to focus on much else. Closing a practice is one of the most exhausting and annoying things I have ever done.

    I spend at least a couple of hours a day playing music, creating transcriptions, and the like. This morning I just did a transcription of The Days of Wine and Roses, which I execute on Sibelius G7 (old legacy $60 software) that I love as a tool. I am no superstar, but I certainly can play. I read music fluently. Play classical as well as jazz guitar and piano plus I sing as well. These are just the facts, not braggadocio. When I get out from under the task of copying medical records which could be a few more months, I need to find work doing something else. I'd love to play music, but...well, you know it isn't easy to make a buck these days on gigs. I'm working to hone my repertoire.

    All I was trying to say was that while studying texts on music theory is both interesting and essential, ultimately one must develop the ears. Because theory is like the skeleton of the body, but without the ears one cannot execute properly. At least that is my opinion. I was trying to suggest alternative approaches to learning "chord movement" - exactly what the OP intended is not clear, though I interpret that as the use of min sixths and diminished chords.

    Of course, the OP requested the names of books for reference. Someone suggested books on Barry Harris' approach and the name of Alan Kingstone, whom I don't know. Of course, he did contribute a post last night. Hope he is well - I used to ride motorcycles in my misspent youth and know what it is to lay the bike down. I hope he will return to contribute to the discussion and to explain the essence of his book on the BH system.

    Some people devote themselves to discussion of CST, modes, and other topics they find interesting. I understand that, but I prefer to play the standards as the most effective approach to learning jazz harmony and technique. For anyone with a desire to improve, I think the most effective way is to use notation software to create transcriptions from the Real Book or other sources which gives you midi files to use to rehearse and helps you to become a more complete and accomplished musician. Apart from the work of practicing to acquire the best technique of which you are capable, using notation software will supercharge your progress more than any other element assuming you are beyond the beginner stage as a guitarist. I have no vested interest in pushing this agenda. It is my honest opinion.

    I do record with an all-in-one stand alone digital recorder - a now legacy Korg D1200 - on which I produced the two things up on my YouTube channel including one of my original songs - Madoff's Madness. A song that originated as a joke. I do write other original material not on my YT site. If you listen to those, please use decent headphones, as YT degrades the audio and the recordings are made as headphone mixes. I personally hate the sound of stuff through tinny computer speakers. Those songs represent "live" takes, as I cannot comp tracks or do any serious editing with the Korg and I don't have a computer DAW and I would not use Autotune even if I had it as an option. Hopefully soon in the future.

    Lastly, if anyone would like a transcription of a favorite standard, I would be happy to e-mail them one from my library of personal Sibelius transcriptions which I create. My Romance, My Funny Valentine, The Shadow of Your Smile.... . I am not the most tech savvy person. The other day I tried to upload a music file of one of my recordings via Dropbox after opening an account and found that I inadvertently was uploading my son's whole I-tunes library. Nearly had a heart attack, thinking it would be transferring the whole thing to get lost in cyberspace. I canceled the account. So to put a video, I have to create an audio or other video on YT. Takes a little time.

    Anyway, appearances to the contrary, I don't know why the focus should be on me as an individual. I was not trying to stifle discussion of theory but rather to suggest the most concrete and effective way to learn what the OP is seeking. Joe Pass used to say, "Learn songs!" I think he is right on the money.

    Sorry for the long post about moi, but as the song title goes, You Don't Know Me - now you do know a little more.

  13. #112

    User Info Menu

    Really, Mike? (Destinytot)

    Did I address you in any way? Insult you? I think you miss the point. And if you don't like my version of The Shadow of Your Smile - your prerogative, of course - would you be so munificent as to post your own version, so we may compare. If I changed the melody a hair, it was inadvertent. But I don't think anything is carved in stone, other than gravestones.
    Last edited by targuit; 11-15-2015 at 12:03 PM.

  14. #113

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by docbop
    I used to feel that way about the book, but then picked up same thing from hearing a piano player talk about it and wrote it out myself and the whole concept fell into place and just a matter of woodsheding it. I recently pull out Alan's book and now I can see the info was there.

    I've been away from this site for awhile and what I learned was to stop looking for books and such. You read books about the great players and how they learned no one just gave them example, they were taught concept and left to figure things out on their own. I've been in the mode while I've been gone and learned the process of finding the answer is the real teacher. The piano player explained it a bit different than the Allen's Barry Harris, but after putting in the seat time and seeing what's going on the answer is the same. I fact I think I learned more getting it from a piano player because I had to workout all the guitar side on my own. As Budda said.... The journey is the reward.
    I see that I am not the only one here who thinks that experience is the best teacher.

    And even Mark and Destinytot liked this comment. I do, too. But I'm not allowed to say the same thing.

  15. #114

    User Info Menu

    So comping from my point of view is always about supporting whats going on.

    If that's comping behind a melody... then that's what you should be doing, supporting the melody. There lots of approaches to doing that... but unless there's an arrangement or prearrangement or verbal cue... the comping should never move above the melody.

    When your comping behind a soloist... then you have options. Sometimes your just a backing tract... usually do to the soloist abilities. They need a rock solid backing to perform their memorized improve etc... and unless you have the skills to always have that prearranged backing track always implied while you interact etc...keep it solid.

    Generally when performing in a jazz style... just as the soloist is improvising, so is the accompanist or rhythm section. Now you can really get into comping... the next level of...
    as this thread was looking for, Creating Chordal Movement.

    So what do you have to start with... the melody and the basic changes, the chords. So there is a general tonal center, the basic tonal center of the tune, at least with most standards. Both the melody and the changes generally have the same tonal center.

    That's the basic tonal reference, the tune may move around, modulate, modal interchange etc... but those are usually harmonic or tonal embellishment... composers personal tastes etc.

    So when you comp... you need to be aware of root motion... what the chords are, the tonal reference. The root doesn't need to be played and more chords and voicings can and are usually added to help create whatever type of comping feel your performing... but there is organization. And it's better to be aware of what your playing than just trial and erroring your way through.

    Most good accompanist... compers... voice from a melodic line. That line can be the actual melody and embellishments, a counter melody or a type of groove melody. The melody line gives shape and feel to the changes. You can always just use rhythm to make anything work... but when the harmony and melody work together, you create Harmonic Rhythm. The melody is really just harmonic notes with embellishment... chord tones, all notes imply a chord.

    Anyway... Most generally voice that melodic line on top, at least most of the time.

    Don't get hung up on voice leading... voice leading is just the first step to becoming aware of harmonic motion... chord movement. The voicings and voice leading are just choices of how to imply that chord movement. That being said... if you don't know the basics of voice leading. You may not be ready to actually learn how to comp. It's not complicated and there is more than enough BS out there to figure it out in a week or two. Take the time to notate out the very physical possibilities.

    So moving on to actual techniques of creating Chord Movement.

    You have some basic choices... if you add more chord attacks to the rhythmic pattern of what tune your comping to... The additional chords are going to be,

    Diatonic....
    inversions or chords that imply the same tonal function.The basics are using diatonic to mean physically from the implied scale and chords built from same functional scale degrees. Cmaj7...being a Imaj7 chord with tonic function... the root, 3rd and 6th degrees, E-7 and A-7. Do the same with Dominant and sub dominant.

    The next level of usage is for diatonic to be applied in modal approach, different guidelines.

    The next level would be different organization to create diatonic like function to chord movement... I use blue notes and Melodic minor to create a diatonic functional feel to chords and chord patterns.

    Passing and approach chords....
    now your moving past the macro tonal approach, your opening the door for micro or tonal targets. Each chord can become a tonal center, opens the door to modal interchange, subs, chord patterns etc...

    Now the technical aspects.... you need to be able to perform any and all of these approaches to comping on your instrument.

    You need to be able to play... any note... on top of any chord... any where on your fret board.

    You can take any melodic line and voice it in style and feel that the tune implies. Using any of the typical melodic embellishment techniques.

    I use octave transpositions a lot. Helps create feel of movement with out really adding that many new chords.

    Here's a simple diatonic example from 1st two bars of November's Standard..."In Your Own Sweet Way" add whatever rhythmic feel you want.

    5 X 5 5 3 X
    5 X 5 5 4 X
    X 5 4 5 6 X
    X 5 4 5 4 X... or use Dom.approach, 4 X 4 5 4 X or chrom.app.4 X 4 4 4 X
    3 X 3 3 3 X
    3 X 2 3 3 X

    or with octave displacement...

    5 X 5 5 3 X
    5 X 5 5 4 X
    X X 10 9 8 10
    X X 10 11 11 13
    X X 10 11 11 11 make 3rd,4th and 5th chords a triplet...
    X 10 8 10 10 10
    8 X 8 9 10 10

    The basic trick...what makes you actually sound good. Is to develop a collection of chord voicings. There are only so many Basically the seven Diatonic chords from...
    -Maj/Min,
    -Melodic minor
    -Harmonic Minor...

    I just use 6th, 5th and 4th string root versions of most chords... anyway pick the voicings that you like and that help imply different styles.
    Be able to play different lead notes on top of those chords.

    Then learn some approaches to connect chords... I use Chord Patterns, diatonic, functional... passing and approach and then voice melodies on top.

    Just using those basic 7 chords from the three scales and being able to voice different lead notes, 3rds,5ths,7ths,9ths 11ths, 13ths and altered notes from different harmonic organization has almost unlimited possibilities. ( yea Dim and whole tone etc...) sorry they sound weak and not very soulfill personally... they generally sound like you don't know what to play. sorry.PO. Anyway I'm around today...
    Last edited by Reg; 11-15-2015 at 12:36 PM.

  16. #115
    destinytot Guest
    Select... Print... Save to PDF... Wonderful - thank you, Reg!

    This really resonates:
    Most good accompanist... compers... voice from a melodic line. That line can be the actual melody and embellishments, a counter melody or a type of groove melody. The melody line gives shape and feel to the changes. You can always just use rhythm to make anything work... but when the harmony and melody work together, you create Harmonic Rhythm. The melody is really just harmonic notes with embellishment... chord tones, all notes imply a chord.

    Anyway... Most generally voice that melodic line on top, at least most of the time.
    I'd like to ask a question, please: if you could only use two voices at a time, which harmonic notes would you most likely use (on a standard)? Thanks in advance.

  17. #116

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by destinytot
    Select... Print... Save to PDF... Wonderful - thank you, Reg!

    This really resonates:


    I'd like to ask a question, please: if you could only use two voices at a time, which harmonic notes would you most likely use (on a standard)? Thanks in advance.
    Hey man nice to hear from you, thanks for question...
    It would depend on what I'm playing etc... but generally I would use a counter melody as the 1st or top voice and then make 2nd line a counter melody to my 1st line, but more of a implying harmony function type of roll. Basically play 3rds and 6th with embellishments and use the bottom line for harmonic cliche functions, ex. on G-7 to C7, 7th to 3rd thing. but somewhat embellished etc... Bb, Ab G, / F# .

    So the lead line would be my melody... which could reflect any harmonic approach, the chord tone reference is secondary, the main relationship would be to the harmonic approach... blue notes, modal or just tonal... chord tones relationship would again reflect the harmonic approach. and then I would develop harmonic relationships with the 2nd voice and interval implications... which would reflect the style and feel of whatever I'm playing.

    The basic 7th chord tones are basically implied after the 1st time through and style and feel etc... I generally don't want to play what's already implied unless I feel it's needed because of soloist or complexity of music. Most standards are extremely basic etc...

    And your probably already aware of how I use playing on and off the tunes harmonic rhythm or implied harmonic accent pattern... the harmonic groove. I always use tension on the week side of implied harmonic accent pattern to help create harmonic motion... chordal movement. Also make changes groove, or lock etc...

    Obviously I don't really need to think that much when I'm performing.... I've been doing it for years and I put in the time and understand Music etc. But most of my performing is improved, I don't really play the same thing over and over... good or bad, Even when I'm playing same changes and same voicing I've played a million times... there are always different grooves, and lead lines to develop.

  18. #117

    User Info Menu

    Barry harris.

  19. #118
    destinytot Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Hey man nice to hear from you, thanks for question...
    It would depend on what I'm playing etc... but generally I would use a counter melody as the 1st or top voice and then make 2nd line a counter melody to my 1st line, but more of a implying harmony function type of roll. Basically play 3rds and 6th with embellishments and use the bottom line for harmonic cliche functions, ex. on G-7 to C7, 7th to 3rd thing. but somewhat embellished etc... Bb, Ab G, / F# .

    So the lead line would be my melody... which could reflect any harmonic approach, the chord tone reference is secondary, the main relationship would be to the harmonic approach... blue notes, modal or just tonal... chord tones relationship would again reflect the harmonic approach. and then I would develop harmonic relationships with the 2nd voice and interval implications... which would reflect the style and feel of whatever I'm playing.

    The basic 7th chord tones are basically implied after the 1st time through and style and feel etc... I generally don't want to play what's already implied unless I feel it's needed because of soloist or complexity of music. Most standards are extremely basic etc...

    And your probably already aware of how I use playing on and off the tunes harmonic rhythm or implied harmonic accent pattern... the harmonic groove. I always use tension on the week side of implied harmonic accent pattern to help create harmonic motion... chordal movement. Also make changes groove, or lock etc...

    Obviously I don't really need to think that much when I'm performing.... I've been doing it for years and I put in the time and understand Music etc. But most of my performing is improved, I don't really play the same thing over and over... good or bad, Even when I'm playing same changes and same voicing I've played a million times... there are always different grooves, and lead lines to develop.
    That's extremely helpful - thanks, man! (It's for flute and cello behind vocal and nylon guitar in lowered tuning.)

  20. #119

    User Info Menu

    Wow. Hi, Reg!

    Nice response. Be careful to genuflect, or you might stumble. I'm being ostracized for suggesting, as did Docbop, that the best way to learn "chord movement" is to learn actual jazz songs employing min sixths and diminished chords, which is to say virtually 90% of standards.

    Reg, could you post a nice ballad like Body and Soul to demonstrate your solo voice leading?

    What is happening these days? Hope all is well.
    Last edited by targuit; 11-15-2015 at 03:51 PM.

  21. #120

    User Info Menu

    what a thread!!!..

    what I was taught..the elements of patients, determination, persistence and experimentation are key ingredients in music in general and guitar in particular..learning jazz is all those aspects-on steroids!

    chord melody is its own style and demands .. if your just doing "fills" behind someone in a combo..you may have more time to take some risks and see if a "chord run" works

    but to be able to do any of this takes knowing which tool to use..that is knowing all the basic harmonic structures-chords-chord scales-inversions and all combinations of them - in all keys in all positions..

    yep its a lot of work..to say you may not need to do all this - ok - you may learn how to do several chord melodies in several keys..and that's it..if that is all you want and or need to know and you satisfied with just that..then all is good

    if your a working musician on your own..you should have all the tools you need-just in case.."..Oh we are doing the tune in Ab..Yikes!"

    the original question was chord movement..for me this is different than moving voices as they are notes within the chord itself..and is a separate and a bit more intense study as it relates directly to the dictates of the melodic line..

    chord movement may just mean the given chord is G7 - (using a blues as an example-and a very good way to begin to experiment with this kind of thing due to the harmonic freedom it allows)and you may vamp G13 Bb13 G7..(this kind of thing depends on the tune of course)..your not going to embellish the chord with soprano or inner voice moves..just basic comping..as I understand the question anyway..

    the thing with this is knowing when you can use it in a tune..now you can read all the books and vids you want..only experience will teach you this stuff..it has to come from within yourself..a strong level of confidence is needed and the ability to perform without doubt..this takes time to develop

    Ok your in a combo and you know the tune and the basic chords..now you have four bars of CMa7..and the melody is pure diatonic CMA for those bars..you could play some safe chords..CM7 Dmi7 Emi7 Ami7 Dm7 G7 and back to CM7
    depending how rhythmically you put those chords together and if they are on the higher strings it could be a nice chord run..

    If I understand the original question that is the desired result...in learning not only HOW but WHEN to move chords..


    watching UTubes of the top players and books will work for awhile..best advice I can give..find a GOOD teacher .. and/or find a guitar buddy who is better than you and will work with you on this stuff until it becomes like breathing

    I have been very fortunate to have very good guitarists as longtime friends and we would trade ideas and hold chords for each other for hours while we developed our lines and chord work..and I had a guitar/music master for a teacher..

    I realize many don't have that and its a long journey with all I had..for others not so lucky..longer still..

  22. #121

    User Info Menu

    On the topic of chord movement and "In Your Own Sweet Way", check out this superb take on the tune:


  23. #122
    destinytot Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by PMB
    On the topic of chord movement and "In Your Own Sweet Way", check out this superb take on the tune:
    Thank you for posting this outstanding clip.

  24. #123

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    Nice response. Be careful to genuflect, or you might stumble. I'm being ostracized for suggesting, as did Docbop, that the best way to learn "chord movement" is to learn actual jazz songs employing min sixths and diminished chords, which is to say virtually 90% of standards.
    This is wrong in at least 3 ways:
    1) This is not why you are being "ostracized." You are being "ostracized" because you come off as a condescending jerk, which you have been told several times over the past few years and you still don't get it. I am not saying that you are a condescending jerk but only that you have come across that way several times now to several members who have a reputation for being easy to get along with. Physician, heal thyself!
    2) This is not what you actually said.
    3) "Virtually 90 % of standards" do NOT have minor-sixth and diminished chords.

  25. #124

    User Info Menu

    Mark -

    I respectfully disagree with your contention that I am incorrect regarding the use of minor sixths and diminished chords in jazz. They are in almost every jazz standard that is not a strict "blues". I can not vouch for the "90%" figure, but I could list myriad common standards in which these harmonic devices are used. All the things you are, Autumn Leaves, Body and Soul, But Beautiful, Corcovado, Estate, Georgia on my mind, How Insensative, MyRomance, My Foolish Heart.... just scratching the surface.

    "Condescending jerk?" When have I seen you publicly reprimand other posters who have exceeded the forum decorum in my regard much more egregiously than I? (Rich B) The answer is virtually NEVER. You yourself accused me of being a 'fraud' and other unsavory terms more than once. I may not be George Benson, but I can play and you know it. And I certainly do not recall any apologies emitted by you in my regard.

    My 'faux pas' was the temerity to suggest that simply learning concrete standards was the best way to assimilate the harmonic devices in jazz, and I stand by that opinion. I did not denigrate or attack any individual on this thread in a personal way, unlike several of the responses to me. I simply questioned the "orthodoxy".

    As I pointed out, my opinion as to the best way to assimilate the use of these harmonic devices is by learning to play actual jazz standards is shared by many others on the forum and Joe Pass among other famous musicians. Was Joe a "condescending jerk"? Perhaps you could quote and link verbatim passages from my posts on this thread that fit that definition or in which I castigated other posters personally. I could easily post examples of personal vilification in my regard. What a double standard!

    Frankly, if anyone wishes to devote their time to delving into books on harmony, I could care less. That is their prerogative. I thought expressing a considered personal opinion was mine. Apparently not....But for those whom I "offended" by trying to advise them to help them achieve their objectives, I do apologize. Such a rarity here on the Forums.
    Last edited by targuit; 11-16-2015 at 11:43 AM.

  26. #125

    User Info Menu

    Does this feel "out of this world" to anyone?

  27. #126

    User Info Menu

    So getting back to comping... you can use or not use min.6th chords and Dim chords or voicings, but how you use them or why might be more important than using or not using.

    Generally there is a reason or tonal reference for why your playing the changes your playing. Not just because you can or it's just what you know, it's your latest thing, or the worst... trying to sound hip for other musicians.

    Any tonal direction can be used, through substitution, modal interchange or any number of other harmonic devices to change or camouflage the starting harmonic reference... the basic changes.

    Personal choice is cool or it sounds good is good enough for me, but understanding what your doing harmonically might make what your playing work better in ensemble playing. There is jazz common practice.

    Hey Jay here's something I posted 5 years ago on this forum... don't remember why and if I played the tune again... I'm sure it could be different depending on what I would be using for a reference...


  28. #127

    User Info Menu

    Quote 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.

    Here, Mark, I saved you the trouble of reviewing the entire thread. I suspect that this is the most egregious post of mine on this thread. Do you find any particular poster named as "a moron" or some other denigrating term? No. Do I trash talk any particular individual? No. Do I call anyone a 'fraud' or "imposter"? No.

    If you notice, I was taking a jocular approach - "It's like CST - for kids, not adults musically speaking." Wow! That is pretty heinous, isn't it? I guess many posters felt slighted.

    And then there is this inflammatory remark - "....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."

    Could get you locked up for years for such heresy. If you lived during the Inquisition.... I certainly insulted every one of you personally with that damning remark. Despite the fact that I did not name one poster or contributor on the forum. But of course, if your point is that no dissenting opinions are permissible, who needs real evidence, right?

  29. #128

    User Info Menu

    Beautiful playing, Reg! Man, I like hearing you play ballads!

    Now, although I don't have a video camcorder, I am going to try to film a video with my old Canon camera of this very same tune, same key, just to demonstrate a couple of concepts. And I will post it up on my YT site, just to dispel the pervasive notion on the part of some that I don't know from where I speak.

    As the old saying goes, "money talks, bullshit walks". I hope that is not too 'condescending' to some.

    To get back to your video and the subject of the thread, I note you remarked that you don't like to play diminished chords, right? Is there a particular stylistic reason? I'm going to listen to your video again. Excellent playing and I hope you will post more of your ballad work soon. Really nice.

  30. #129
    I think if someone who wants to help the group and really understands this stuff could make a video going over each measure of standard and saying this is how we create movement..... Maybe a song like My Romance.....
    Maybe they also have some idea on what to practice to create chord movement..
    thanks
    Ken

  31. #130
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg

    Diatonic....
    inversions or chords that imply the same tonal function.The basics are using diatonic to mean physically from the implied scale and chords built from same functional scale degrees. Cmaj7...being a Imaj7 chord with tonic function... the root, 3rd and 6th degrees, E-7 and A-7. Do the same with Dominant and sub dominant.

    The next level of usage is for diatonic to be applied in modal approach, different guidelines.

    The next level would be different organization to create diatonic like function to chord movement... I use blue notes and Melodic minor to create a diatonic functional feel to chords and chord patterns.

    Passing and approach chords....
    now your moving past the macro tonal approach, your opening the door for micro or tonal targets. Each chord can become a tonal center, opens the door to modal interchange, subs, chord patterns etc...
    Hey, Reg. I was wondering if you generally consider the order of these presented above to be more or less in order of priority for students learning this stuff?

    I personally think this would be a pretty good outline for a thread, or more realistically, a series of threads on this topic. I would personally be very interested and grateful. Maybe beginning with some default fingerings for leadline chords for the three scales, as a starting reference. I've never seen that if you've posted it somewhere else.

    I know it's a crazy busy time of year. Was wondering about maybe in January?
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 11-16-2015 at 01:05 PM.

  32. #131

    User Info Menu

    Thanks Jay... I don't like Dim chords because they tend to reflect very old Maj/min functional harmony, or worse a filler chord for changes. They tend to lose the tonal reference... instead of implying. I understand they can be used functional but they tend to be symmetrical and not very deep as far as tonal reference layering, which personal tends to become very vanilla.

    Ken... I understand this stuff extremely well and can verbally breakdown as well as perform examples with out rehearsing etc... I have tons of standards that I have gone over measure by measure, but memorizing examples usually doesn't make you understand... if you could help narrow what your trying to understand as far as creating harmonic movement, it would help. Do you have trouble with the big picture or macro approach, being able to create a harmonic analysis of a tune from which you would create harmonic movement... (add chords and chord patterns), with some type of harmonic organization which is related to that analysis.

    Or are you at the stage where your beginning to have micro approaches, already understand basic tune analysis and begin to have tonal targets. The next step, using organization when creating relationships with those tonal targets.

    Reg

  33. #132

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    Hey, Reg. I was wondering if you generally consider the order of these presented above to be more or less in order of priority for students learning this stuff?

    I personally think this would be a pretty good outline for a thread, or more realistically, a series of threads on this topic. I would personally be very interested and grateful. Maybe beginning with some default fingerings for leadline chords for the three scales, as a starting reference. I've never seen that if you've posted it somewhere else.

    I know it's a crazy busy time of year. Was wondering about maybe in January?
    Hey Matt...yea somewhat, I believe the order would be how far away from the tonal center or reference you get.

    Diatonic to basic maj/min harmonic reference, then creating different guidelines for controlling diatonic, like different modal reference etc... It's pretty straight ahead stuff, and somewhat plug and play application, lots of options which do result with builtin tonal organization.

    Ya would be fun, January does sound better, but I'll help as much as I can.

  34. #133

    User Info Menu

    I agree with Targuit that learning tunes is the most valuable method to learn about harmony and movement. However, I also think that one needs a basis to go from before just learning tunes can be effective. Barry Harris' method is in my opinion a good method for learning the basics and going from there. I think we should switch to talking about something that is really contentious just to mix it up a bit. I'll start: how about that new Starbucks cup, seriously? :-)

  35. #134

    User Info Menu

    There are many great books for chord movement:

    Mick Goodrick's Voice Leading Almanacs
    Randy Vincent's 3 Note Voicings and The Drop 2 book
    Alan Kingstone's Barry Harris Method for Guitar
    Brett Willmott's Chord books...

    Etc.... These have great concepts within them and apply them to tunes... A book is as good as how you use it. Music has a lot of room for concepts and development... What's there to argue about?

  36. #135
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Thanks Jay... I don't like Dim chords because they tend to reflect very old Maj/min functional harmony, or worse a filler chord for changes. They tend to lose the tonal reference... instead of implying. I understand they can be used functional but they tend to be symmetrical and not very deep as far as tonal reference layering, which personal tends to become very vanilla.

    Ken... I understand this stuff extremely well and can verbally breakdown as well as perform examples with out rehearsing etc... I have tons of standards that I have gone over measure by measure, but memorizing examples usually doesn't make you understand... if you could help narrow what your trying to understand as far as creating harmonic movement, it would help. Do you have trouble with the big picture or macro approach, being able to create a harmonic analysis of a tune from which you would create harmonic movement... (add chords and chord patterns), with some type of harmonic organization which is related to that analysis.

    Or are you at the stage where your beginning to have micro approaches, already understand basic tune analysis and begin to have tonal targets. The next step, using organization when creating relationships with those tonal targets.

    Reg
    Hi Reg,

    I guess I'm really starting from the beginning so would like a foundation first on how to think about chord movement. for example if you were playing My Romance in Bb . It has 2 chords per measure so basically I'm looking for adding chords and subs as well and how to actually think about the different ways to approach it.
    thx
    Ken

  37. #136

    User Info Menu

    GP007 - The Devil here! Before we get into videos, let's take a look at My Romance out of a Real Book. I would suggest for simplicity the key of C which is in fact the key Joe Pass plays this tune on his fine solo classical guitar CD, Unforgettable, if I recall. If I may, I would also premise that before you worry about substitutions, we simply look at the chord changes and think about what they imply. While I don't know at what level you play, we can at least examine the "chord movement" (the definition of which still eludes me) or at least how min 6 chords - in essence the equivalent of a min 7 b 5 chord a minor third below - and diminished chords are used. We could address substitutions later. But I would also add that it might profit you to search for "Martin Taylor" on YT and listen to video excerpts from his instructional DVDs on chord melody playing. Martin is a fine teacher, and he makes one point very clear. He remarks that one can play quite properly just the chord changes, but that his art is in implying the changes by the interplay of voices, which makes for a richer and more complex sound. He illustrates this very well in his DVDs.

    My Romance in the key of C begins with a pickup bar of two eighth notes. The first chord in the second measure is a Cmaj followed by the minor second, Dm7. Here after for brevity I will use a hyphen between two chords or more to indicate the movement within the measure, as in Cmaj7 - Dm7. Next comes Em7 (iii7) - Ebdim7. Note that this latter chord is on the 'weak' third beat and transitions to the next measure. Dm7- G7. "...in the sky. Cmaj7 - Bb13. Here following the ascending phrase of the first few measures we being the descent. Am - Am#7: the 7th of the Am is a G - note that the #7 is a G#. Depending on where in terms of fret position you decide to play the initial Am, the Am #7 is a simple example of a nice voice leading movement. Eg, if you play the Am at the fifth fret sounding the A on the fourth string seventh fret, dropping to the sixth fret with your second finger you sound the G# with a nice descending voice lead as you head to the next measure: Am7 - A7, a nice little change from minor to seventh in which you play the g note on the fourth string fifth fret. Then Dm7 - G7, a classic ii7 - V7 cycle turnaround back to Cmaj7 - C7. Even here, you have the movement of the B note descending to the Bb of the C7.

    Next measure: "no month of" - Fmaj7 - F#dim7. To Cmaj7 "May" - C7. Note the connection of the voice leading in these phrases - smooth. The next measure repeats the Fmaj7 -F#dim7 to the next Cma7 "stars". "No hide a-"
    F#m7 - F7b5. " way, no.." Em7 - Eb7. " no soft gui-" Am9 - D7. "tars. Dm7 - G7.

    I don't know if this is helpful, but I'm trying to show you that just attention to the character and color of the chords as defined by the major or minor 3rds , the nature of the 7ths (flat or natural or raised sharp), and the colors flat or raised 5ths, 9ths, 11ths or 13ths in combination with m6ths and diminished chords suggest the movement.

    You can sound pretty hip just playing these chords as is, though Martin creates more complex interplay of the voices moving independently. That is the artistry of his technique and ears.

    There is the rest of the song to complete, but it would be too tedious to chart it all out here. And of course an audio/visual demonstration is helpful to hear the voice leading of Richard Rogers. As far as substitutions, I don't think they are called for in this song, but that is an artistic decision.

    I hope I have not insulted anyone's intelligence by putting forth this measure by measure account, as that is not the intention. If this is too 'simple', well perhaps someone else can explain it on a more complex harmonic level. But this is an introduction. And if you listen to Joe Pass play this song on his album (I've also heard him play it the key of A, but that is just a transposition), he doesn't use subs. He just plays it eloquently and like me in a 'simple' way.
    Last edited by targuit; 11-16-2015 at 07:30 PM.

  38. #137
    HI Jay,

    I'll have to see if I have My Romance in C...I took lessons on Martin Taylor site for a while, his finger style is rather amazing...But now I decided to work on my improv on Richie Zellons site..but still want to work on chord movement,comping and CM on the side...
    Thanks for the insight!!!!
    Ken

  39. #138

    User Info Menu

    I am at a distinct disadvantage in making visual as opposed to audio videos because I don't have a camcorder and have to use an old Canon point and shoot camera which has rather primitive video functions. If I do film a visual video, I will record the sound simultaneously with my Tascam DR-5 recorder and then in the computer synch the sound to the video, as the sound off my Canon sucks frankly. All that can be done, but for me not being especially tech savvy, it takes time which is a precious commodity around my house these days. But I'll try to put something together. Right now I have neither time nor silence in the house.

    You are welcome, Ken. You can just transpose the chords down a major second to be in Bb.

  40. #139

    User Info Menu

    I think it depends what you are going for.

    Learning dim7's and minor 6ths and their use as passing chords is pretty essential if you are interested in playing swing and bebop. Old school functional major/minor harmony. Fletcher Henderson era big band stuff. Block chords. Etc....

    Later on, jazz harmony becomes more modal and floaty, and people derive scales largely from 7 note scales. Intervallic clusters, upper structure triads and so on.

    I like both styles of harmony, and both have their place. If I am playing fusion I probably won't play dim7's too much as it doesn't really fit the style (unless the tune has a gospelly or bluesy vibe.)

    Barry Harris takes your old school harmonies - major 6, minor 6, dom 7, dim7 and runs them together into 8 note scales that can be used to create rich and beautiful harmonic voice leading that sounds logical, rich and expressive - like the harmony of Chopin. I feel for straightahead playing this is it for me - both 'old' and 'new' at once, classic and timeless. Much better than when I hear harmony derived from 7-note chord/scales and doesn't quite sit right in this type of music, to my ears.

    (The sort of thing where you put an E altered scale structure of some type on an E7 chord in the key of C just sounds a bit wrong to me. Not bad per se, just a bit Jamie Aebersold jazz camp/70's Berklee for what I want when I'm playing a great old ballad or something. It seems that some players are moving consciously away from this type of harmony - it has it's place though.)

    So if you are interested in creating harmonic motion in standards, Barry Harris is a great guy to check out.

    It's a matter of taste though - some guitarists make harmonic choices to me that sound very ugly, but they are way more advanced in terms of what they can do than I am. Sometimes their 'ugly' harmony is nonetheless kind of interesting and evocative.

    I think the thing to get away from is thinking 'dim7' or 'major 7' and start to see harmony as groups of voices moving together and apart, occasionally resolving on some familiar chord, intuitive and based on listening to what the soloist is doing.

    When you are on your own you can play whatever you want - but if you have a modal soloist you need to play modally. If your soloist is very bop, you need to play in a different way, and so on.

    And then - there's Monk, Mingus, Ellington and so on, where you may as well chuck out your textbooks and write new ones...

    TL;DR use your ears and make aesthetic choices accordingly. Listen to as much music as you can, and study what goes on in the music as best you can.
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-16-2015 at 09:58 PM.

  41. #140

    User Info Menu

    Oh, the Lage Lund video is interesting as well if you fancy something quite challenging. Its at jazzheaven.com

  42. #141
    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    GP007 - The Devil here! Before we get into videos, let's take a look at My Romance out of a Real Book.
    Jay,

    First, are those really Richard Rogers'changes? The changes in a real book are "jazzed up" changes to begin with. Not to mention the fact that, (I thought) we were talking about IMPROVISING chord movement. I suppose you could do some kind of analysis of the original vanilla changes on some of these tunes and compare...

    All of that of course IGNORES what reg is getting at in his video and many others: substitution, modal interchange, defining tonal centers with chord movements at macro and micro levels etc. (He's doing a lot in between the changes as well, on more of a micro level than the basic changes in this tune.)

    I'm confounded by your compliment of reg's playing while, in the same thread, implying that all of this is an overcomplication. Honestly, I don't come away from Reg's video thinking that he's playing it "pretty simply" from the original changes, (nor do I think that's "simply" what Joe pass did). He's bringing a lot more harmonically to it and actually TALKING about it as well.

    I personally don't think that Joe Pass himself would find Reg's playing to be either simple and straightforward (from the original tune), nor over-the-top (beyond the kind of jazz that you say you like in Joe's playing).

    Honestly, we've got dozens of reg's videos here we could talk about . The one that was put up was fine and had plenty of material. What did you think about the harmonic concepts he used and talked about on THAT tune besides that it was nice or whatever? I'd especially like to know what you think about the things that he brought in harmoniously which WEREN'T just on the original chart.

    Jay, I wouldn't fault you for being a casual player or hobbyist (like myself), nor for finding many of these concepts to be somewhat over your head... but to continue to talk about them as if you know all of them and then demonstrate otherwise (in this confounding post above),...you're not helping yourself.

    Like yourself, I enjoy singing simply, playing the Great American songbook standards, and a lot of chord melody, especially ballads. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, and I think it's healthy to just own that aspect of who you are. But that's not quite the same as playing real jazz in a jazz style.

    You're always talking about not caring for Charlie Parker or whatever, but what about Joe Pass? I think you're greatly oversimplifying Joe's playing as well if you're implying that he played things, even simple cord melodies, "pretty straight from the changes".

    I don't think folks on this forum are going to have anything negative to say about your posting chord melody or singing or playing standards if you're not acting like you know EVERYTHING about all aspects of jazz at the same time.

    I find it personally insulting , and I'm not even a real jazzer myself.
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 11-16-2015 at 10:16 PM.

  43. #142

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    So getting back to comping... you can use or not use min.6th chords and Dim chords or voicings, but how you use them or why might be more important than using or not using.

    Generally there is a reason or tonal reference for why your playing the changes your playing. Not just because you can or it's just what you know, it's your latest thing, or the worst... trying to sound hip for other musicians.

    Any tonal direction can be used, through substitution, modal interchange or any number of other harmonic devices to change or camouflage the starting harmonic reference... the basic changes.

    Personal choice is cool or it sounds good is good enough for me, but understanding what your doing harmonically might make what your playing work better in ensemble playing. There is jazz common practice.

    Hey Jay here's something I posted 5 years ago on this forum... don't remember why and if I played the tune again... I'm sure it could be different depending on what I would be using for a reference...

    Haha Barry Harris would scorn you for you desertion of the biiio7 (there's a whole rant on this) - it's aesthetic choice - he loves that chord, you hate it, but you know the sound and make your choice... As long as it backs up the melody... I happen to think straight dim7's are a bit 1930's, but dim7's with notes borrowed from the key or half-whole scale - much more interesting....

    (Recently for a recording the composer of a tune asked to 'swingify' the changes of one of his tunes - a Confirmation like A section. This is what I did...

    Original:
    Gmaj7 | F#m7b5 B7 | Em7 A7 | Dm7 G7 | Cmaj7 | Cm7 F7 | Bm7 E7 | Am7 D7

    My 1930's Django style style reimagining
    G6 | B7 | Em6 | G7/D | A7/C# | Cm6 | G/B Bbo7 | Am7 D7 |

    I like doing this kind of thing, and vice versa. I'm using similar principles to reg, but in reverse, taking out the ii-V-I's and adding in dim7s and inverted chords to get that chromatic bass movement that so fascinated Django, Cole Porter and Jobim.)

    Your comping here sounds kind of 60's blue/note era - I hear that kind of Wes vibe very strong. I think of this era as having more minor seventh/ninth sounds on the minor chords rather than minor 6's - more ii-V'ey kind of changes in general. More floating and open even on a harmonic tune like this one. The dim7 would kind of be out of place here.

    One could also stick in a ii-V chromatic thing as well - I hear a lot of players do this where the melody permits. Might not be the best on B&S though...

    I want to encourage anyone studying the video to pay close attention to the way reg uses rhythm in the comping - these voicings are relatively straightforward by contemporary standards, and should be well within the grasp of most jazz players, but the rhythm really makes it all sound great. Simple chords with hip rhythm will always sound good, and the soloist will thank you!

    Lovely playing as always :-)
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-16-2015 at 11:35 PM.

  44. #143

    User Info Menu

    BTW reg, what would you do on a tune that has a kind of structural dim7 in it like Insensatez or Corcovado? Would love to know... Play some fruity half-whole voicing?

  45. #144

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    Jay,

    First, are those really Richard Rogers'changes? The changes in a real book are "jazzed up" changes to begin with. Not to mention the fact that, (I thought) we were talking about IMPROVISING chord movement. I suppose you could do some kind of analysis of the original vanilla changes on some of these tunes and compare...

    All of that of course IGNORES what reg is getting at in his video and many others: substitution, modal interchange, defining tonal centers with chord movements at macro and micro levels etc. (He's doing a lot in between the changes as well, on more of a micro level than the basic changes in this tune.)

    I'm confounded by your compliment of reg's playing while, in the same thread, implying that all of this is an overcomplication. Honestly, I don't come away from Reg's video thinking that he's playing it "pretty simply" from the original changes, (nor do I think that's "simply" what Joe pass did). He's bringing a lot more harmonically to it and actually TALKING about it as well.

    I personally don't think that Joe Pass himself would find Reg's playing to be either simple and straightforward (from the original tune), nor over-the-top (beyond the kind of jazz that you say you like in Joe's playing).

    Honestly, we've got dozens of reg's videos here we could talk about . The one that was put up was fine and had plenty of material. What did you think about the harmonic concepts he used and talked about on THAT tune besides that it was nice or whatever? I'd especially like to know what you think about the things that he brought in harmoniously which WEREN'T just on the original chart.

    Jay, I wouldn't fault you for being a casual player or hobbyist (like myself), nor for finding many of these concepts to be somewhat over your head... but to continue to talk about them as if you know all of them and then demonstrate otherwise (in this confounding post above),...you're not helping yourself.

    Like yourself, I enjoy singing simply, playing the Great American songbook standards, and a lot of chord melody, especially ballads. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, and I think it's healthy to just own that aspect of who you are. But that's not quite the same as playing real jazz in a jazz style.

    You're always talking about not caring for Charlie Parker or whatever, but what about Joe Pass? I think you're greatly oversimplifying Joe's playing as well if you're implying that he played things, even simple cord melodies, "pretty straight from the changes".

    I don't think folks on this forum are going to have anything negative to say about your posting chord melody or singing or playing standards if you're not acting like you know EVERYTHING about all aspects of jazz at the same time.

    I find it personally insulting , and I'm not even a real jazzer myself.
    Ciao, Matt!

    I hesitate to point this out, Matt, but you are talking about two different songs. Reg's video was an excellent version of Body and Soul in C#. The modest analysis I examined briefly here was about half of the tune My Romance by Richard Rogers in the key of C. Two different songs.

    Although I do not own the CD Unforgettable by Joe Pass and have not heard a complete version of his recording of My Romance in C, the excerpt some twenty plus seconds or more heard on Amazon of this specific CD is in the key of C, if I recall, and follows the same key changes. As I pointed out, I have heard a version by Joe in the key of A, which is also solo chord melody, but is a bit more typical Seventies and Eighties Joe Pass style with his penchant to interpolate more single note runs. I cannot argue one way or the other about the veracity of the changes except to remark that those are the changes in my one Hal Leonard The Real Little Jazz Book, a plastic semi-spiral book I bought back in the early Eighties. These changes are the ones I have heard in most versions of the song I have ever heard, whether instrumental or with vocals by singers like Sinatra, Bennett, and other vocalists. But I don't suggest they are set in stone. Unlike the minds of some people.

    As regards Reg's lovely version of Body and Soul in C#, I think those were the standard changes one finds in the same HL Real Book that I cited above and most versions I have heard by other artists like Billie Holiday, though this version is in the key of Ab and has a more retro sound.


    As Reg and I discussed briefly, he prefers not to play the diminished seventh chords, which he covers just fine. I would suggest that is a personal choice, as Christiann discussed well. Apart from that deviation from the Real Book, Reg played the tune in a sensitive and rhythmically interesting manner. I have no specific negative criticism of Reg's version, and I hope he will play more ballads. As far as "...substitution, modal interchange, defining tonal centers with chord movements at macro and micro levels etc.", I confess that apart from substitutions (including the "omission" of diminished chords and substitution of single note riffing that works in the context of his version), I don't pay much (theoretical) attention to "modal interchange". I play what I hear as appropriate in the stylistic context. Ears.

    Secondly, as regards "defining tonal centers with chord movements at macro and micro levels", I think he managed to stay in the appropriate key very well. (- joking here, Matt - that is what the smile means, no?) As far as I could hear, Reg's 'macro' choice of the chords in the progression were pretty straightforward. Or to put it another way, he played the same changes I would with the exception of the diminished seventh chords as we noted above. If by "micro level" is meant the actual melody or voice leading as he nicely articulated, I have no quibble there. The melody is the melody, though some deviation here and there is tolerated by most as an interpretation (Mike -Destinytot excepted). Certainly it was not atonal or "out", which would sound rather weird with this tune.

    As regards "I'm confounded by your compliment of reg's playing while, in the same thread, implying that all of this is an overcomplication...", I don't really understand what you mean. I will reread my post complementary to Reg's playing, but I don't recall saying that or implying it. I suspect you are referring to "macro micro" stuff which apparently is impressive to you. I'm not sure beyond choice of style, rhythm (bopish or swing), tempo, etc, what you are referring to or what Reg intends. Maybe he can speak to that. What may be "overcomplication" would be a contention that some overarching new and improved harmonic thesis is essential to play that song as Reg played it and countless other musicians have for some seventy years or so (I don't know the exact date Rogers composed the song). I don't think I said that nor Reg nor Christiann. But perhaps you are referring to something else.

    "...nor do I think that's "simply" what Joe pass did..." - As I remarked earlier here, I don't have a complete recording of Joe Pass version of Body and Soul on the Unforgettable CD, but there is a version that is more complex in terms of melodic excursions and single note runs recorded by Joe Pass in the key of A, consistent with his style approach in the Seventies and Eighties. The version in C to which I referred is more restrained, consistent with his approach to the other tunes on that CD (Amazon sampling).

    Continued in next post -
    Last edited by targuit; 11-17-2015 at 03:30 AM.

  46. #145

    User Info Menu

    I'd especially like to know what you think about the things that he brought in harmoniously which WEREN'T just on the original chart." To be quite honest, apart from some minor melodic single note phrasing, I don't think Reg brought in anything remarkably different from the "original chart" harmonically, the choice not to use diminished seventh chords excepted. That is not a criticism - Reg played the tune beautifully in my opinion.

    "Jay, I wouldn't fault you for being a casual player or hobbyist (like myself), nor for finding many of these concepts to be somewhat over your head... but to continue to talk about them as if you know all of them and then demonstrate otherwise (in this confounding post above),...you're not helping yourself. "
    "I don't think folks on this forum are going to have anything negative to say about your posting chord melody or singing or playing standards if you're not acting like you know EVERYTHING about all aspects of jazz at the same time.
    I find it personally insulting , and I'm not even a real jazzer myself
    ..."

    Well that is very magnanimous of you to forgive me my ignorance, Matt!

    I have never maintained that I am a professional musician, Matt, or even that I "know everything" - that would technically be "omniscience" and my psychopathology has not yet reached that point. After all, I did get a bit distracted for some thirty plus years by mastering another "hobby" of mine - the practice of medicine. As Graham noted, one does have to read lots of books to master that hobby after completing four years of college, four years of medical school, and then a minimum three years of residency with those eighty plus hours per week at a pay that came out to a whopping $6 or so. That was before I became a cog in the machine for some 25 plus years of actual independent medical practice. As I said, a minor distraction from becoming a professional musician.

    On the other hand, I do play classical guitar as well, so ....nothing. Sorry you feel personally insulted. But, I like to think that despite "not knowing everything" (it is getting a little late in the fourth quarter), I do have something in common with Joe Pass beyond my Italian heritage. Joe used to argue for "keeping it simple". He also remarked on several occasions in interviews that he knew nothing about modes (paraphrasing), so maybe he didn't know much about "modal interchange" like me or care to. Still, he did manage to squeak by somehow.

    Check out the video on YT of his "An Evening With Joe Pass" DVD. I miss Joe Pass and his sense of humor. Something that seems often to be too rare here on the forum these days....and don't be so sensitive. Life is too damned short.

  47. #146

    User Info Menu

    Reg - I wonder if anyone noticed one of the most important aspects in my humble opinion about your phrasing, rhythmic feel, and perhaps most importantly the fingering used in your excellent and lovely comping example of Body and Soul. Gosh, if we were in a classroom, we could take a show of hands and see if anyone guesses where I'm heading, especially as regards the fingering.

    But we aren't in a classroom or 'clinic' (Joe Pass used to say " Clinic...makes me feel like I'm a doctor or something..." - I miss Joe Pass!). Anyway, first the phrasing and rhythm. I put them side by side because that is how they work together. I love the bopish feel and rhythm you give the song changes and melody as opposed to say the approach in the lovely Billie Holiday recording which is more laid back. Nice, but today I prefer Reg's thing.

    Second, the fingering. What is it that attracted my attention? Two things - first, the grip or fingering that Reg uses on his minor seventh chords in terms of the lush use of the bass strings with close voicing as opposed to a more open fingering. To be specific I'll cite just one example. The first Ebm.fingered at the fourth fret position with the sweet F natural high note fingered at the sixth fret of the B string, as compared to a barre form Ebm7 at the sixth fret. Much more lush, and also allows you to do something that is very important in my opinion. I don't know what the proper term is or even is there is a specific term, but for lack of a better alternative, I call it "playing behind the chord form" or from behind. The melody and the bass are voiced so much better this way. I think this is one of the most important concepts that Reg expertly demonstrates, and if you take away just one thing, I think this may be the most important.

    I'm not sure if I'm expressing the concept articulately, because it is one of those things that you can demonstrate easier face to face than in words. But I'll bet that Reg and Christiann know what I'm getting at. So much more lush sounding and playing "behind the chord" gives you both better melodic articulation as well as the important bass voice leading or even segueing into Wes style octaves for melodic articulation (used sparingly for effect). Just a great example. My personal favorite from the videos Reg has up on his YT site.

    Btw, I tried getting a video of my version of this tune using my old Canon digital "point and shoot" camera. It does have a video function, but just putting on the desk front of me doesn't capture the video in terms of the visual of the fret board and right hand in the frame and especially the audio. So I may revert to just putting up the audio recording that I can make with either my Tascam DR-05 or my old Korg D1200. Take me a few days to find the time - I'm up to my neck in medical records to copy. I'm experimenting a bit with playing the tune in the key of B rather than C#, just cause I like the way the turnarounds happen in that key. Especially the part where the vocal goes "...for you I cry, for you,dear, only, why haven't you seen it..."

    Btw, it is not my intention to lead the thread off the path of the theoretical treatises such as that authored by Alan, which I have not read, regarding Barry Harris' method. I was hoping he would stick around to discuss a bit. But, I think Reg's video just reveals so much that is very important and deserves to be highlighted. But if you all think the comments are off base, please chime in and I'll remain quiet for a while. Hard to do when you have a bit of ADHD...
    Last edited by targuit; 11-17-2015 at 11:48 AM.

  48. #147

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    Second, the fingering. What is it that attracted my attention? Two things - first, the grip or fingering that Reg uses on his minor seventh chords in terms of the lush use of the bass strings with close voicing as opposed to a more open fingering. To be specific I'll cite just one example. The first Ebm.fingered at the fourth fret position with the sweet F natural high note fingered at the sixth fret of the B string, as compared to a barre form Ebm7 at the sixth fret.
    I can't watch the video at the moment (but I watched it last night) - I think you just mean he played Ebmin9 (X6466X) rather than Ebm7? That's what I use on this tune also (I think we're talking about Body and Soul in this clip, right?). The F is where the melody goes to, so it sounds right anyway. And it voices more smoothly into a Bb7#5 for a nice V7 sound.

    Actually I use minor 9 chords a lot more than 'strict' minor 7s, they just sound more 'jazzy' to me. I don't actually like that Ebm7 form at the sixth fret much, it's a bit 'pop/rock' to me. If I do play that chord shape, I often get rid of the 5th (the one on the D string) and make it a 4th instead, sounds a bit more 'McCoy Tyner' or something.
    Last edited by grahambop; 11-17-2015 at 12:03 PM.

  49. #148
    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    I hesitate to point this out, Matt, but you are talking about two different songs. Reg's video was an excellent version of Body and Soul in C#. The modest analysis I examined briefly here was about half of the tune My Romance by Richard Rogers in the key of C. Two different songs.
    I understood. Didn't mean to communicate that I believed we were talking about the same tune.

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    As regards Reg's lovely version of Body and Soul in C#, I think those were the standard changes one finds in the same HL Real Book that I cited above and most versions I have heard by other artists like Billie Holiday, though this version is in the key of Ab and has a more retro sound.
    The basic changes are there...with much more in between as well. Are we talking about the same video? There's a lot going on which isn't "just the changes", but which imply the original changes. Of course, if it's done really well by a Joe or Reg, it sounds simple and beautiful, but that's beside the point.

    First, the things which he is doing to "imply" the original harmony are not all "in", "basic" or "simple". I'm not trying to quote you directly there, but that's the vibe I get. We can say it's just basic for someone like Reg or Joe or maybe you, whatever.... but there are actual real terms and ways which musicians describe these things. It's no more contrived to talk about them in the ways that Barry Harris does or Reg does (in this very video) in theoretical terms than it is for you to talk about playing in Bb or C. It would be asinine to call the key of Bb the "whatty whatty" or some such garbage "because you don't need theory if you have ears". BS.

    I don't necessarily need to "think" to play a melody in Bb, but if I talk to another musician, why would I not come up with terminology which describes it? There's some kind of semantics or terminology misunderstanding with the way you talk "at" other members of this forum on this topic.

    First, I'm calling you out. No more garbage about scales, key signatures, note names, etc. etc. etc. from you if you're going to imply that others are beneath you for talking about music using theoretical terminology. You are the only one on the forum who insists that using terminology to discuss concepts equals thinking about theory while improvising. There is absolutely a place for thinking about things while practicing, working things out, or transcribing. You do it every day in transcribing things. Of course you don't think about all of that while improvising for real, but that's beside the point.

    At a certain level music theory is nothing more than vocabulary by which musicians communicate. You use it in every post and then call demean others for doing the same. So, the new mantra for responses from you which include any musical terminology are going to be met with, "Use your ears, and stop thinking so much." And yes, this sentiment is as ridiculous as it sounds, whether you're talking about scales, chords or advanced harmonic concepts.
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 11-17-2015 at 12:16 PM.

  50. #149
    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    I confess that apart from substitutions (including the "omission" of diminished chords and substitution of single note riffing that works in the context of his version), I don't pay much (theoretical) attention to "modal interchange". I play what I hear as appropriate in the stylistic context. Ears.
    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    To be quite honest, apart from some minor melodic single note phrasing, I don't think Reg brought in anything remarkably different from the "original chart" harmonically, the choice not to use diminished seventh chords excepted. That is not a criticism - Reg played the tune beautifully in my opinion.
    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    Joe used to argue for "keeping it simple". He also remarked on several occasions in interviews that he knew nothing about modes (paraphrasing), so maybe he didn't know much about "modal interchange" like me or care to.
    Again, Joe and Wes had terms for discussing all of these concepts. Even if they didn't call it modal interchange, it's one version of the vocabulary for talking about them. I think you're absolutely wrong that reg is basically just playing the changes of the tune. He even says as much at the end of his "basic" video which you like so much. Something to the effect of "you can't just play this..." (basic changes). Cheesy rhythm aside, the way he plays the rest of the tune is vastly different harmonically.

    Jay, I think you would be well served to spend a small percentage of your daily transcription time transcribing portions of reg's video and posting here for other members. It would gain you major karma points, further the actual OP, and we could all get past the semantics of terminology of what is "basic" for some vs. other ways of describing it for those of us who are students. I believe what's presented in this video is excellent material related to the topic and would provide loads of interesting discussion.

    You need some Jay points. This is a homerun. :-)
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 11-17-2015 at 12:19 PM.

  51. #150
    Why don't you get a webcam and use that to make videos