Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 39 of 39
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    Why does it work? Lets say I have a diatonic A7 and I start playing a C7 arpeggio over it. Then I might go for the tritone sub Eb7(#11) and the F#7(#11).
    I understand that the C7 is from the backdoor IIm-V7 (IVm-bVII7) and kind of implies a minor sound. In my head its like turning major sounds into minor.

    So why does the Eb7#11 and the F#7#11 work? Why does tritone substitution work so well other than having the 3rd and the 7th of the dominant chords? I see that these two chords are the tritone subs of the A7 and the C7 - I would just like to hear your thoughts on it

    The fourths seem to sound better raised too, unlike on the regular V7 and the backdoor dominant bVII7

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    basically, because of the cycle of minor thirds. Really all we are ever doing is dividing up the octave and composing that out over time. So that is why all of those arpeggios work out. They come from the same cycle.

    then if you want to look at why each of those arpeggios work at a "tactical" level, look at the root, 3rd, 5th, and 7th as they relate to A7

    lots of altered extensions, aren't there?

    so a dominant chord can be heavily altered and as long as the tritone is in there, it will function and resolve the same way as the unaltered dominant.


    what you are doing is called "superimposition" if you want to look into it some more

    so good stuff experimenting and exploring there. well spotted

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Take all of those dominant chords, and add a b9 to them. Then omit the root, and you'll have your answer.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Thanks! I gave up on jazz a couple of years ago because I just couldn't find a way to keep up with the changes and still feel the music. Last winter I kind of started practising again. Having played other styles I had stopped thinking about scales and focused on the chord tones. But it still has been a struggle with the altered scale. How to stop thinking about it? I'm really trying to develop a way of hearing it an alternate way. Maybe I'll call it the diminished/minor third superimposition

    Then there are more weird scales I still need perspective on but thats another subject...

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    the chord tone way is a good way. That's what I do is use chord tones as targets for where my line is going.

    with the altered dominants, remember that all your altered notes are just a half step away from all your chord tones. The b9, #9, #11, b13 are all just a half step away from the root third or fifth

    that might give you some ideas to fool around with

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Some people refer to it as the "Family of four" or "group of four". I tend to think of it as the diminished group.

    There's a similar kind of thing with 7#5 chords. Because the whole tone scale is symmetric, you can move a 7#5 chord around in whole steps. (You get a nat9 and a #11 as tensions).

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Here we go again :-)


  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    I think of this sort of playing as a very organized way of playing altered tensions over a dominant chord. I like your approach to thinking of the arpeggios as it helps to avoid a "scalar" sound in your improvisations. In your A7 chord you can think of the altered scale over it, most of what you mentioned is in that scale with the exception of the F# note.

    Here is the altered scale starting on A

    A-Bb-C-Db-Eb-F-G

    A7 is spelled A-C#-E-C7 is spelled C-E-G-Bb
    Eb7#11 is spelled Eb-G-Bb-Db-A
    F#7#11 is spelled F#-A#-C#-E-C

    So for the C7 over the A7 the C is implying a #9, the E is the 5th, the G is the b7th and the Bb is the b9th.
    For the Eb7#11 over the A7 you have Eb implying a b5/#11th, G is the b7, Bb is the b9, Db is the 3rd and A is root.
    The F#7#11 over A7 is F# (not in the altered scale) as the 13th, A# is b9, C# is 3rd, E is 5th and C is #9.

    Just my 2 cents.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    They all share the same Related Diminished.


    A7/C7/Eb7/F#7

    . =

    C#o/Eo/Go/A#o




    Put those roots in a line - Diminished Scale.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    I like to think of my tonal or diatonic scales as static landscapes, full of nuance and great places to work within them. In my mind, the modal aspects belong to the diatonic landscapes; they're the nuance of tonality.

    Then there're symmetrical scales. They have a uniformity to them. Chromatic, Whole tone, diminished, augmented, true fourths (which do not repeat within the octave), and tritones, to name a few. I think of these as non diatonic ways of getting from one place within the octave to another, and because they're symmetrical, wherever you stop, that's another tonic.
    Symmetrical scales can have a close relationship to certain diatonic chords, as Boston Joe points out, the diminished is very closely related to the dominant... the augmented has a kinship with the melodic minor, whole tone can be used as a diminished (God bless Monk) and when you use the diatonic chords and connect them with symmetrical scales, you can shift them up or down, like a commuter train might take you from one related stop to another via the tonic "stations".

    That way a dominant can move up a minor third (and viola there's the 1,3,b7 waiting there with different tonic relationships).
    You can do this with whole tones too. Symmetrical scales are cool! Check out the Schillinger system of multiple tonics if you want a real eye opener. I think there was a thread about these at some point on this forum.

    That's the way I see the connexion. Maybe it's not what everyone else is talking about, but it's serving me well and keeping me busy in sequences, alternative dominant approaches and general antidote for diatonic ho-humness.

    Have fun
    David

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    So, Jack Zucker has a 12 tone theory of Chord substitution, I forgot the name he gives it, but you could take the major scale, and for every degree of the major scale, treat it like it's a diminished chord and move everything up a minor third, symmetrically. Not just the dominant seventh Vs, but also the I, ii, iii, IV, vi and vii.

    Thus, not just CM7 , But also EbM7, GbM7 and AM7. Etc etc. he has a brief discussion somewhere on his sheets of sound webpage . I'm not qualified to assess it, it's over my head in terms of concrete Applications, although I understand it in theory.

    ( OK I'm killing time here, Pasquale Grasso juat issued his third and fourth online classes. I'm in the process of downloading them now . Between Pasquale, Alan and Ronnie, i've spent quite a bit of time in Barry Harris land. Maybe at some point I'll even watch some of Barry's videos . you think that would be the perfect place to start . )

  13. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by A. Kingstone
    They all share the same Related Diminished.


    A7/C7/Eb7/F#7

    . =

    C#o/Eo/Go/A#o




    Put those roots in a line - Diminished Scale.
    Yup. Play a diminished chord.

    4 X 3 4 3 X

    That's a G#dim7 or also a G7b9 with the b9 in the bass.

    Move your G#dim7 up a minor third. That's just an inversion. That's a Bb7b9 with a b9 in the bass. And so on. G7b9 is the same thing as Bb7 is the same thing as Db7b9 is the same thing as E7b9. In a way that is. Just gotta drop that b9 in the bass down to the root.

    It's called the diminished connection.

    That's where those great dominant subs come from. Beatles used them all the time. V7, bVI7, bII7, and III7.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mokapot
    Having played other styles I had stopped thinking about scales and focused on the chord tones.
    I think that's the best singular thing one can do. You can always start from there, then expand and embellish. If you play just scales that what they sound like.

    Don Mock's book "Artful Arpeggios" is excellent in learning and employing subs. Take a given diatonic seventh chord arpeggio and play it over any given chord. A new sound will come out of it.

    A good way to demonstrate this is to record whole note chords in a key i.e.

    C: Cmaj7 Dmi7 Emi7 Fmaj7 Gdom7 Ami7 Bmi7b5

    Then play a C, E, G, B major seventh arpeggio over each chord. You'll know when the overlay works and when it doesn't.

    Try other four note arpeggios in any key over any chord. Gives lots of truly usable sounds. And it doesn't sound scale-like.

    Any electronic keyboard or even an app to use the computer keyboard to play chords works well for sounding the whole-note chords.

    And or check out Don's book, it's a great investment for few bucks.

    Thanks for the time, -adgp-

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Does anyone ever use the III7 over a V7?

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    So maybe this turned out to be more about "playing outside" the conventional harmony. Lets say that the ionian, the melodic minor minmaj, the harmonic minor minmaj, the harmonic major, the lydian major and the dominant (as the I chord) are the conventional harmony.

    When we play an altered V7 perhaps we are just pulling from the augmented inversions of the minor tonality (IminMaj -> IIIminMaj ->bVIminMaj) after all
    Thanks for your answers, Ill have more to practice now. As if discovering Julian Lages newest album wasnt enough of an inspiration!

    Some ideas I got from here:
    diminished ideas over major
    C – G7 (=G7b9 or G#dim)

    alternate harmony, alternate tonics
    G#dim --> G7 to C
    Bdim --> Bb7 to Eb
    Ddim --> Db7(#11) to F#
    Fdim --> E7(#11) to A

    same with minor, using the augmented triad?
    Cmin – G7#5 (Gaug)

    Gaug -> CminMaj
    Baug -> EminMaj
    Ebaug -> G#minMaj

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    I dunno I think the m3rd symmetry stuff is extremely conventional. Basic even.

    Firstly - relating dominants to the important minor (the minor on the fifth of the dominant chord) is an important conceptual leap in learn to play changes. The dim7 sub is also very important.

    So, V7 bII7 bVII7 sounds are all commonplace in bebop, and swing too (to an extent). Check out the recordings...

    Certainly in standards we have this move - IIm7 --> IVm6 quite frequently (related to V7 --> bVII7 and also IV-->IVm6) . It's a corner stone of changes playing and a common way to handle a ii-V-I...

    It's a small leap from there to full diminished sounds - IIm6 --> IVm6 --> bVIm6, say, which also gives us the altered sound (or tritone minor) on V7... We can use full dim chords IIo7 --> IVo7 --> bVIo7 --> VIIo7, adding in whole-half scales if we want. I like playing the note a whole step above the o7 in the treble and then resolving to the dim7, then moving the pattern up a m3rd each time. Obvious, but sounds great.

    None of this raises any hackles when I do it on swing gigs. In fact, it sounds natural.

    It's worth digging into the connections and similarities between the V phrygian dominant (minor's dominant) scale, the V altered scale and the V half whole (VII whole-half) scales. Often the differences are only one or two notes. For example, the bVIm6 sound is found in the all three scales.

    My video covers the minor's dominant approach in some detail as it is the default one you will find in changes playing jazz post Parker through to the modal period - probably because it's the most straightforward to use melodically. It's often overlooked in the theory books but it's very much the sound of bebop. For more information, check out Barry Harris, although Pat Martino's ideas are also based around these symmetries.

    Your augmented symmetry is commonplace in 30's jazz often in relation to the whole tone scale. BTW Four on Six has Wes playing a whole tone scale over the minor.

    I always love the way modern cats think they've invented the wheel ;-)
    Last edited by christianm77; 08-27-2016 at 06:18 AM.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I always love the way modern cats think they've invented the wheel ;-)
    Hahah, true. Theres not a lot of new stuff I guess. But don't we all have to create a system for improvisation? I like to think diatonic is conventional, or playing just the scale tones on a given tonality, thats straight forward to me. When you change it I can no longer keep up with it unless I know whats happening. Thats why I like to analyse it great stuff! Give me a minor 6 arpeggio (coming from IIm6->IVm6->bVIm6) over V7 any day, that way I can hear it

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Doesn't moving a dominant seventh two frets up or down also give you all kinds of alterations of the same chord while remaining dominant ? (Jody Fisher has this demonstrated in his third Jazz Guitar book)

    If both mechanisms are true, the combination turns into the typical jazz tautology of every note "works" :-)

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    "...I always love the way modern cats think they've invented the wheel ;-) .."

    I think it more like "discover" the wheel...

    taking apart scales and chords..and seeing all the related points they have is really like .. as ted greene put it "chord chemistry"

    Ben Monder uses a C MA7 and twists it into Eb13#5b9...when we discover that the function of any chord can be changed and used in a different context it gives us a sense of freedom in our playing ..using all these concepts is a life long journey in playing music..

    perhaps it does feel like inventing something new..that has been hiding in plane sight all the while..

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Does anyone ever use the III7 over a V7?
    It's a minor third from the dominant of the key. It works if you hear it. It'll make a good line if you create movement.
    on the one hand, that's a sound unto itself. It always sounds like a part of a dominant cycle 4 progression (like the bridge of rhythm changes: III7 | VI7 | II7 | V7) .
    On the other hand that third moves nicely down to the tonic fifth, the chord works when going to a major 9th chord of some sort.
    But it's not a sound that's in my ear. The root occupies a spot that evaporates into the first inversion of the tonic chord. It starts in a position of stability for the target. I'll bet with work and good phrasing, you could make it work christianm77, if you hear it and create lines around what you're hearing.
    Do you hear it?

    David

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by medblues
    Doesn't moving a dominant seventh two frets up or down also give you all kinds of alterations of the same chord while remaining dominant ?
    THREE frets up or down for each chord shape/type. Everything moves up and down in minor thirds. a minor third equals three frets on the guitar.

    I have found that if you work the 4 drop 2 dominant 7th grips associated with strings 1-4 (1573, 3715, 5137, 7351), You can create a seemingly endless variety of material in which, after internalizing the left hand grips and understanding how to move from each to each, the creativity is only limited by the combinations and permeations generated by the right hand.

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Fm Bbm Eb7 Abmaj7
    Dbmaj7 G7 Cmaj7
    to
    Fm9 Bbm9 Eb7->C7 Ab6
    Dbmaj7#11 Dbm9/E->Em9/G C69

    this is how id use the III7, first showing the listener that im implying the V7
    Dbmaj7#11 I lower by two whole steps and take out the root, it becomes a minor chord with a third on the bass Dbm9/E
    the Em9/G comes from going up a minor third

    Im not a real pro jazz musician but these are just some ideas I liked thanks to this thread I have a simple system of using dominants in minor third cycles and minor chord sounds in augmented sequences (or whole tone every now and then)

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fuzzthebee
    Don't know the book, but from melodic minor we get dominant 9 chords separated by a tone, between the 4th and 5th degree. Basically F13#11, can sub for G9b13 and vice versa.
    Hmm, the rule I have learned that over any dominant chord, you can create interesting lines mixing and matching melodic minor built from the b9, P4 and P5 of the dominant chord. Thus, over C7:
    C# melodic minor
    F melodic minor
    G melodic minor

    Gets you all the extensions and alterations. Its the simplest way I can think of it.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NSJ
    THREE frets up or down for each chord shape/type. Everything moves up and down in minor thirds. a minor third equals three frets on the guitar.

    I have found that if you work the 4 drop 2 dominant 7th grips associated with strings 1-4 (1573, 3715, 5137, 7351), You can create a seemingly endless variety of material in which, after internalizing the left hand grips and understanding how to move from each to each, the creativity is only limited by the combinations and permeations generated by the right hand.
    I guess one page for educational purposes would not violate copyright:

    Moving a dominant chord up a minor third-img_20160827_124930-838-jpg

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    I'm not sure what you're point is.. All I said is you can play Dominant chord and move it up a minor third, as you would a diminished. C7-Eb7-Gb7-A7. Using the same grip, but moving up three Frets, i.e. A minor 3rd

  27. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Does anyone ever use the III7 over a V7?
    So III7 in C is the notes E G# B D. Over a G7 chord that makes 13, b9, 3 and 5.

    A bVII7 is Bb, D, F, and Ab. On a G7 that makes #9, 5, b7, and b9.

    A bII7 is Db, F, Ab, and B. On a G7 is #11, b9, 7, and 3.

    Each has its own characteristic.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by TruthHertz
    It's a minor third from the dominant of the key. It works if you hear it. It'll make a good line if you create movement.
    on the one hand, that's a sound unto itself. It always sounds like a part of a dominant cycle 4 progression (like the bridge of rhythm changes: III7 | VI7 | II7 | V7) .
    On the other hand that third moves nicely down to the tonic fifth, the chord works when going to a major 9th chord of some sort.
    But it's not a sound that's in my ear. The root occupies a spot that evaporates into the first inversion of the tonic chord. It starts in a position of stability for the target. I'll bet with work and good phrasing, you could make it work christianm77, if you hear it and create lines around what you're hearing.
    Do you hear it?

    David
    I'll give it a go. I suppose you end up playing relative minor.

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NSJ
    I'm not sure what you're point is.. All I said is you can play Dominant chord and move it up a minor third, as you would a diminished. C7-Eb7-Gb7-A7. Using the same grip, but moving up three Frets, i.e. A minor 3rd
    I am not disagreeing with you. If moving up or down two frets also works in addition to minor third (three frets), then moving a half step works as well. So any chromatic movement would work which then makes all of these observations kind of not useful. I think this is where theory ends.

  30. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by medblues
    I am not disagreeing with you. If moving up or down two frets also works in addition to minor third (three frets), then moving a half step works as well. So any chromatic movement would work which then makes all of these observations kind of not useful. I think this is where theory ends.
    I believe this is where theory ends up. And it's glorious. Theory is not rules. It's labels. Rules are compositional.

    But, when dealing with theory it's not where you end. It's how you got there. It's true that if you go far enough, any note is available to you. But it's the intention and ideas that count. Not the individual note.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Generalmojo; 08-27-2016 at 06:12 PM.

  31. #30

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by medblues
    I am not disagreeing with you. If moving up or down two frets also works in addition to minor third (three frets), then moving a half step works as well. So any chromatic movement would work which then makes all of these observations kind of not useful. I think this is where theory ends.
    well..if you explore diminished and augmented theory..you will discover many related and implied scales and chords that can be used in many different ways and yes you can find use in chromatic movement..but its part of "all these observations" not separate..

    this type of exploration is what Coltrane did to leave behind scale step thinking and diatonic harmony in general..and instead of one tonic he worked with three in the augmented approach and four tonics in the diminished approach..and all the related and implied chords and scales found within these two methods

  32. #31

    User Info Menu

    @medblues, thanks for that.

  33. #32

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston Joe
    Some people refer to it as the "Family of four" or "group of four". I tend to think of it as the diminished group.

    There's a similar kind of thing with 7#5 chords. Because the whole tone scale is symmetric, you can move a 7#5 chord around in whole steps. (You get a nat9 and a #11 as tensions).
    Because a 7#5 is completely composed of notes from the whole tone scale? A 7b5 chord is also composed of notes from the whole tone scale. A 9b5 and a 9#5 are the same thing a whole tone apart, right? Basically one played the entire whole tone scale as a chord, leaving out the b5 to form the 9#5 and leaving out the #5 from the 9b5. So by moving the chord a whole step you just changed the location of the one missing tone. And a 9#5 b5 is the entire whole tone scale played as a chord, so it has 6 roots. But I never heard someone say you can move a 7#5 around in whole steps. Can you do the same thing with a 7b5?

  34. #33

    User Info Menu

    "..But I never heard someone say you can move a 7#5 around in whole steps. Can you do the same thing with a 7b5? "

    as Boston Joe pointed out in his post..."family of four" / diminished group...

    the 7b5 (as well as many other chords) can be found within the diminished scale and you can move it in minor thirds...

    ie: C diminished has embedded in it: C D Eb F Gb Ab A B

    D7b5 F7b5 Ab7b5 B7b5

    now another very cool thing embedded in the C dim scale are Tri-Tone scales:

    D Eb Gb Ab A C -- For D7b5 and Ab7b5
    and
    F Gb A B C Eb -- for F7b5 and B7b5

    these scales can be used in place of diminished functions and many other places..they connect well with many different scales and arpeggios..

    there are quite a few more chords to found in the scale ... explore... its really an amazing scale
    Last edited by wolflen; 08-30-2016 at 01:27 PM.

  35. #34

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Binyomin
    Because a 7#5 is completely composed of notes from the whole tone scale? A 7b5 chord is also composed of notes from the whole tone scale. A 9b5 and a 9#5 are the same thing a whole tone apart, right? Basically one played the entire whole tone scale as a chord, leaving out the b5 to form the 9#5 and leaving out the #5 from the 9b5. So by moving the chord a whole step you just changed the location of the one missing tone. And a 9#5 b5 is the entire whole tone scale played as a chord, so it has 6 roots. But I never heard someone say you can move a 7#5 around in whole steps. Can you do the same thing with a 7b5?
    Of course you can. I use whole tone stuff like this all the time.

  36. #35

    User Info Menu

    Every theoretical system is system of relations...

    Ideally first we hear that it works and then we imply relations.

    Goethe once said: if we do not see the color it does not exist...

    I like this principle based on primacy of perception...
    what sounds is just sounds, it is us who imply relations to them and develope iut into language...


    What was mentioned in the OP can be explained in a few ways... when I first descovered the sound (and I did myself) I tried to find some diatonic relations first, then I did not try to relate chords and thought mostly as a way of playingof extensions, then I came across Barry Harris method and he has very beautiful elaborated and logical explanation, then I got into chord-scales and it worked to...

    But we should not forget that theoretical approach will effect our playing even the choice of notes and context will be absolutely the same (it will phrasing, accents, breath, articulation etc.)

    Even if we do not formulize theory we have it and apply it... otehr wise we just would have been able to hear these sounds musically as an integral piece, phrases and all

  37. #36

    User Info Menu

    I like chords. Im pretty good at them, modifying them as I wish.

    I don't like to think scales because it confuses me. I think theyre important but they make me confused with too many choices and too little I can actually hear. Julian Lage talked about playing scales in random order but I dont know, the guitar seems to be easier to play thinking about a couple of chord shapes.

    Rather than having an altered scale I like to be in a melodic minor/minmaj mindset and then kind of go on a "move it down a major third" journey. I also dont think the root note matters, I like the tension and release concept. Major 6 chords or minor chords with the third on the bass? Same thing to me!

    But hey I do play a scale sometimes. I call it an arpeggio like D minor 13
    Last edited by mokapot; 08-30-2016 at 10:21 AM.

  38. #37

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE]
    I don't like to think scales because it confuses me. I think theyre important but they make me confused with too many choices and too little I can actually hear. Julian Lage talked about playing scales in random order but I dont know, the guitar seems to be easier to play thinking about a couple of chord shapes.
    I see ttwo points here

    1. What you say is common thing... and I suppose it is based on teh fact that we all look for the ways to do it easier way...

    whereas accomplished professionals with 20-30 years of gigging (I do not say even great)... they usually speak about doing it in any way


    Mostly they would specify their own preference... but again usually they can do it anyway... I saw it personally many times.. they say: some do it like this.. some play it like this ... and I play it like this - meanwhile he just played all the ways with almost the same speed accuracy musicality....


    I think it's just time... you aggregate it live it through...

    At the beginning it it like you just want to find a path in some unknow world... at teh end you are this world yourself... no path needed... it's all just you now.

    it's really an endless journey... I remember when I was talking only about classical fingerings... (this and onbly this is efficient!) or then shapes was kind of discovery (oh this is how they do it!)... then scdales...
    Then this fingering... that fingering... this slide that shift...

    Once I told to one of the teacher: I play arpeggio with reference to... he almost interrupted me: ok ok... after all there should be no references, even nop arpeggio... just the sounds you want to hear right now.

    Now I cannot say I am through (if it is ever possible)...
    but more and more it seems just like it does not matter any more... now you feel you just begin more or less moving around without any maps or guidbooks just walking wherever you feel you want to go
    Though as I said it is probably never-ending journey

    2.
    We should see the difference between musical theory and some practical tips players use... though both effect actul playing...
    chord shapes is not theory it is a way to visualize concept on teh fretborad... maybe kind of physical approach..
    but not a musical theory...
    organizing scales in triads as many do, or just applying triads everywhere is not musical theory too.
    after all you could actually relate scales to chord shapes to if you want...

    Musical theory is first of all about listneing... it is how we hear music (being musicians or non-,usicians) and it does not matter for us he the player stack it in triads, or thisnk of chord shapes... we hear int all together and we hear musical relations.

    But as I said these little player tricks could effect articulation and phrasing too

    Visualization is different topic... guitar to me is mixed visual/non-visual instrument: one one hand you can see many things (more than trumpeter) but by far not like on piano or vibes, on another it is so complex that actually you just come to point that sometimes it is better not seeing it)))

    I can play piano and sight-read so I mostly vizualize things not in chord shapes or whatever guitaristic things would be but as keyborad or abstract staff...

    Finally I notice that visialization always gradully goes more and more on the background... usually you visualize concious things.. some new ideas or concept... but mostly you begin to do it directl 'hear and play'...
    Last edited by Jonah; 08-30-2016 at 08:06 AM.

  39. #38

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Binyomin
    But I never heard someone say you can move a 7#5 around in whole steps. Can you do the same thing with a 7b5?
    Really? I've heard it a lot, from a lot of different sources. And yes on the 7b5 because the whole tone scale has that structure as well. But with the 7b5, you can also move it around in minor thirds because it's also found in the diminished scale.

    The obvious implication of this - as someone mentioned above - is that any 7b5 can substitute for any other 7b5 provided that you mind your 9ths and 13ths. If the underlying harmony is fundamentally diminished, you wouldn't want to move up a whole step because you'll get a natural 9. But if it's fundamentally augmented, you're good.

  40. #39

    User Info Menu

    "What you say is common thing... and I suppose it is based on teh fact that we all look for the ways to do it easier way...

    whereas accomplished professionals with 20-30 years of gigging (I do not say even great)... they usually speak about doing it in any way""

    "We should see the difference between musical theory and some practical tips players use..."



    Agreed that this is only an approach and not the only truth there is. And sooner or later I'll mostly likely have forgotten about it. But for now I am happy with this way of hearing stuff if that makes sense