Approaching functional tunes modally

[Boston Joe]

Last night I was at ensemble rehearsal and we had a substitute bass player. We were doing Autumn leaves in a weird groove, and the bassist was playing a lot of pedal tones. He suggested that I take a more modal approach to comping and gave me a couple of suggestions, but I realized that I know pretty much nothing about to take a modal approach to a standard type tune with functional harmony. It's something I'd really like to understand as I try to modernize my style.

So here's my uninformed line of thought: A II-V-I can be thought of as being all in the I key (let's use C for simplicity), so in theory, I could use any chord from C major anywhere (Being careful to avoid using a chord that contains F natural over the C).

That's about all I've got. I'm not even sure what my actual objective is, if it isn't to resolve.

Mind you, I can play the hell out of a one chord vamp, but when I do that, the tune itself is modal. When I try the same approach over functional changes, it tends to sound bad.

So back to Autumn Leaves. Am - D7 - G - C. VERY tonal. Where do I start?

[joe2758]

[Boston Joe]

Thanks, Joe, I've watched that one a couple of times, but that's more about soloing than comping. Plus, I find it kind of hard to follow Reg's writing/speaking style.

[bako]

No way for me to know what this bass player had in mind but..............

here's an experiment to try:

Record an E pedal tone groove for the length of the form, loop it if you have the tech

Against this play the melody

gradually introduce chordal info

play mostly middle to upper register

solo on the changes

listen for the influence the pedal has on the harmony

consider alternative paths and subs, omitting or adding chords

solo with these variations in mind

E is probably the clearest functional note against this song but try similar experiments
with all other notes from the harmonic area

I find that this type of game adds new info to how I perceive the movements within a song.
I think of this as a form of ear training, reframing entire songs against various pedal tones.

[Boston Joe]

Thanks bako, I'll give that a shot.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Thanks, Joe, I've watched that one a couple of times, but that's more about soloing than comping. Plus, I find it kind of hard to follow Reg's writing/speaking style.

Reg has also replied to a lot of older threads on modal playing. Any of these videos, by the way, are kind of taken out of context, by themselves. It's actually kind of hard to link them back to the original threads without some research end clever forum search inquiries . I've been trying to link them in YouTube comments as I make the connections , but it's probably worth doing forum search on modal approaches etc.

Reg actually talks as well as anyone about this stuff if you dig into the threads, especially if you dig into the written text as well, and there is a TON of information from several years now.

[Boston Joe]

Reg has also replied to a lot of older threads on modal playing. Any of these videos, by the way, are kind of taken out of context, by themselves. It's actually kind of hard to link them back to the original threads without some research end clever forum search inquiries . I've been trying to link them in YouTube comments as I make the connections , but it's probably worth doing forum search on modal approaches etc.

Reg actually talks as well as anyone about this stuff if you dig into the threads, especially if you dig into the written text as well, and there is a TON of information from several years now.

If you've got pointers to specific threads, I'd be grateful. I've searched some, but only come up with dribs and drabs.

As I said, I do find Reg a little hard to follow. Mind you, I think he's a fantastic player and a stand up dude for sharing all the knowledge he's got, but his presentation style often makes me need to go back and read or view something 3 or 4 times to understand what he's saying. Even then, I'm not always sure if what I'm getting is what he's trying to say. (If you've seen any of my posts on his threads, you'll see that I'm often restating what he says in my words, just to try to clarify things for myself.) This is not intended as a criticism. It's just that his presentation style doesn't really match my learning style very well.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Wow. I may have to dig back into some of this as well. I didn't really do any sorting of results here. this is an advanced search on user= reg, keywords: " characteristic pitch" ...vBulletin Message

[christianm77]

I kind of see changes as being as having levels of detail. So Autumn Leaves A section say....

* Top Level - The tune is in G minor - so modally any of the minor modes. You can think of this melodically. The melody is a sequence through the G minor key with typical chromatics.

* Next level down
| Bb | % | % | % | Gm | % | % | % |

Kind of the modal level, you could easily start doing some modal pedal point stuff. Obviously could use different modes - perhaps the dominants, say:
| F7 | % | % | % | D7alt | % | % | % |

* Next level down - cadences into keys/tonal centres (e.g. V-I say) in , so almost like
| F7 | % | Bb | % | D7(b9) | % | Gm | % | (in fact I might think of the D7 starting a bar earlier)

This is my basic level for soloing and comping unless I am making a point of outlining the changes or playing a specific arrangement. Basic functions, right? I base my own embellishments and substitutions on this simple framework

This could be built into bebop lines (using the Barry Harris approach perhaps) or something much more modal - for example I could solo using the F altered scale for two bars before resolving into Bb lydian. Or I could play an arpeggio line based on a whole set of substitute chords, for example:

Cm F7 | Dbm Gb7 | Cm F7 | F#m B7 | Bb C7 | F7 Bb7 | Eb etc

(for an extreme example)

* Next level down - the standard vanilla Chord Changes.

* Next level down - specific arrangements, chord subs, and so on.

For me the difference between modal and functional is the 2nd and 3rd level. In the 3rd level you have a dichotomy between tense (dominant chords here) and resolved chords (the majors and minors), which is not what you have in modal music.

Now, the way I see it, you are free to reharmonise at any level you want. Reharmonisation decisions are obviously based on context - whether you are supporting the melody, or accompanying a soloist, for example.

Third level down is great for developing your own versions of the changes that are compatible with other musicians. But the top level (melodic key) allows you to do more radical things.

For me once you get down to the Vanilla chord changes level, the changes are already too congested to make substitutions (unless you are playing loads of double time, perhaps.)

To be honest, I think most experienced jazz musicians have something like this going on when they learn a tune.

Playing in a group with a pianist will heavily limit your options.

[matt.guitarteacher]

If you've got pointers to specific threads, I'd be grateful. I've searched some, but only come up with dribs and drabs.

As I said, I do find Reg a little hard to follow. Mind you, I think he's a fantastic player and a stand up dude for sharing all the knowledge he's got, but his presentation style often makes me need to go back and read or view something 3 or 4 times to understand what he's saying. Even then, I'm not always sure if what I'm getting is what he's trying to say. (If you've seen any of my posts on his threads, you'll see that I'm often restating what he says in my words, just to try to clarify things for myself.) This is not intended as a criticism. It's just that his presentation style doesn't really match my learning style very well.

I think we're all with you to certain extent, but it's a lot easier if you can just read throng a little more of the material and watch several videos . Pick up bits along the way. I might start by just skimming through a lot of this and see what you come away with , or what questions you think might be answered with a second reading/viewing.

You'll have to kind of sort through the search results also. A few of them have very little content on modal anything. But it also looks like there are are several major discussions as well.

[Boston Joe]

Wow. I may have to dig back into some of this as well. I didn't really do any sorting of results here. this is an advanced search on user= reg, keywords: " characteristic pitch" ...vBulletin Message

Thanks! I'll do that!

[Boston Joe]

I kind of see changes as being as having levels of detail. So Autumn Leaves A section say....

[snip]

Thanks Christian! That's very helpful.

Playing in a group with a pianist will heavily limit your options.

Indeed. I think when I'm ready to try this out, I'm going to ask him to lay out on a few choruses.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I will say one more thing in defense of reg and his style of speaking. Looking back through these old threads, it becomes obvious that there used to be a great many users on the forum who could hang with him in conversation . Maybe they weren't all at the same level, but they could talk about things.

I honestly am very disturbed that, at times , I'm one of the few who seem to follow ANYTHING he's saying , when I consider myself pretty low level "jazz learner". But then, again, when asked questions, he's usually very patient to answer them, when he has the time.

I don't know what has happened on the forum. There are days when I think it's mostly a gear forum now.

[Boston Joe]

I will say one more thing in defense of reg and his style of speaking. Looking back through these old threads, it becomes obvious that there used to be a great many users on the forum who could hang with him in conversation . Maybe they weren't all at the same level, but they could talk about things.

I honestly am very disturbed that, at times , I'm one of the few who seem to follow ANYTHING he's saying , when I consider myself pretty low level "jazz learner". But then, again, when asked questions, he's usually very patient to answer them, when he has the time.

I don't know what has happened on the forum. There are days when I think it's mostly a gear forum now.

I think if Reg and I were to have a give-and-take in real time, I'd understand him just fine. but there are times in his videos when he doesn't finish sentences (I assume he just figures the ending is obvious. Either that or ADD. ) and times when he finishes sentences with a lick, which usually goes by too fast to catch.

I've mentioned a few times that I'm a Technical writer. As such, I have deliberately developed a writing style where I (usually) state explicitly what the assumed knowledge is (if any), and then proceed in a very linear step-by-step, leave-nothing-out style. That's what the job demands, and, I've discovered over the years, it also hews pretty close to my learning style.

Take for example my post on the Triadic-Chromatic Method. Before I even got into what I was doing with it, I explained what it is and how it works. Probably a lot of people on here already know that stuff, but I figure those people can just skip those parts. I'd rather put in too much information than not enough.

Anyway, that's neither here nor there. Reg's style is what it is, and I don't expect him to change it. It's on me to try to make sense of it all. There's a ton of info there, and I'll manage to tease it out eventually.

[Eastman]

I kind of see changes as being as having levels of detail. So Autumn Leaves A section say....

Christian:

I also found your comments here very insightful and helpful. I've recently been groping to put together this way of thinking about tune analysis, but hadn't pulled it together as elegantly as you have. Are you aware of any other books, videos or lessons that have fleshed out this approach a bit more? In any case, this will give me a lot to work on.

Thanks.

[Boston Joe]

Christian:

I also found your comments here very insightful and helpful. I've recently been groping to put together this way of thinking about tune analysis, but hadn't pulled it together as elegantly as you have. Are you aware of any other books, videos or lessons that have fleshed out this approach a bit more? In any case, this will give me a lot to work on.

Thanks.

Eastman: I'd love it if you'd keep me updated whenever you make a discovery. I'll do likewise. Maybe we can crack this thing together.

[Boston Joe]

Just watched this video and got some good ideas from it.

[christianm77]

Christian:

I also found your comments here very insightful and helpful. I've recently been groping to put together this way of thinking about tune analysis, but hadn't pulled it together as elegantly as you have. Are you aware of any other books, videos or lessons that have fleshed out this approach a bit more? In any case, this will give me a lot to work on.

Thanks.

Hiya, thanks - no not really, TBH. Bits & pieces here and there.

There are books such as Jerry Coker's Hearing the Changes (IIRC) that discuss how to understand changes from the point of view of common 'chunks.'

Perhaps I should write one. Maybe just a set of tune analyses, and a simple recipe for how to boil down changes yourself.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I've mentioned a few times that I'm a Technical writer. As such, I have deliberately developed a writing style where I (usually) state explicitly what the assumed knowledge is (if any), and then proceed in a very linear step-by-step, leave-nothing-out style. That's what the job demands, and, I've discovered over the years, it also hews pretty close to my learning style.

Yeah, Joe. I am, by nature, pretty much exactly the same way. I really really like (or at least the left side of my brain, really likes) more linear, reductionist presentation. I like a clear path, step-by-step, whether it's from someone else or myself. Sequence, all that.

Honestly, I have just come to believe that there are some things in life that can't really be learned in an entirely linear way like that. I've learned it from people like reg, and outside of music, from people like Geoff Lawton. Holistic, immersive learning is pretty tough for nerds like myself, but eventually your see the benefit. You "get" a lot all at once, sometimes after a good bit of time where you feel like you're not getting anywhere.

I honestly think that if you allow yourself to just check out the threads and videos, without judgment, just soaking it up, you may have some of these realizations as well. It's very solid stuff, when you start to get it. At least you'll know what questions to ask.

I've learned more from 30 to 90 second portions of a couple of his videos than I have from years of book reading. Some things just don't work on paper, the real linear way. The same stuff is written in many different books, but honestly, when you look at it on paper it looks like decades worth of material. By the way, the videos are a lot easier to follow if you know his melodic minor fingerings , or at least the main ones. It's really Greek , if you don't know what you're looking at.

[Boston Joe]

I honestly think that if you allow yourself to just check out the threads and videos, without judgment, just soaking it up, you may have some of these realizations as well. It's very solid stuff, when you start to get it. At least you'll know what questions to ask.

Oh, I plan to. It's just slow going.

[Ggg]

Thanks, Joe, I've watched that one a couple of times, but that's more about soloing than comping. Plus, I find it kind of hard to follow Reg's writing/speaking style.

I love Reg's videos :-) I've worked on comping modally and it's great fun. I can't do anything close to what Reg is doing, but still... And the video IS about comping.

Explore chord shapes based on C-dorian and play them over the Cm-F7 part (2-4 or 4-4 intervals are always cool)
Explore chord shapes based on Bb lydian and play them over the Bb maj7 part (and the Eb maj7?)
Not sure what Reg does for the Am7b5-D7 part, I'll check the video again ...
In Gm hes using G-dorian, so you should explore chord shapes based on g-dorian again

4-4 interval shapes in C-dorian
C-F-Bb
D-G-C
Eb-A-D
etc

2-4 interval shapes in c-dorian
C-D-G
D-Eb-A
Eb-F-Bb
etc

[Eastman]

Just watched this video and got some good ideas from it.

Boston Joe:

Thanks for posting this--good information, well presented. The starting point is a "modal" tune, however.

Did you catch this thread? It got way off-track for a while, but has some good information about Wes Montgomery's approach to scale harmonizations. The video lesson at the start is great, and then around post 77 or so there is a link to another good resource.

[Boston Joe]

Boston Joe:

Thanks for posting this--good information, well presented. The starting point is a "modal" tune, however.

True. But as I was watching it, I realized I already knew how to do the pentatonic/quartal thing, so now I'm experimenting with adapting that to use in a tonal context. I find that if I can shift the pentatonics around a little bit over the dominant part, I can get a sense of motion without screaming V-I. I've also found some interesting quintal voicings.

So the video turned into a kind of jumping off point. The possibilities are multiplying quickly.

[StanG]

FWIW, I was listening to a Bob Berg record the other day, but I can't remember which one and which song, but they were playing a standard, and clearly modalizing the changes. Very cool.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Did you catch this thread? It got way off-track for a while, but has some good information about Wes Montgomery's approach to scale harmonizations. The video lesson at the start is great, and then around post 77 or so there is a link to another good resource.

Which thread are you talking about?