Context of dominant chords

[christianm77]

True, but it's also about the tunes. I'll See You In My Dreams is a hot jazz staple, I'm not even sure straight ahead guys interested to play that kind of stuff. In my case, bebop bass players, for example, had to look into charts because they never played that one before.

I know some players (swing guys) who would not like it if you played Django changes on certain tunes (I realise I am getting I'll See you in My Dreams confused with Them There Eyes - sorry about that! Maybe my comments re changes make more sense. But still that E7 is a real GJ thing.)

In fact certain GJ habits such as always adding 6ths to chord particularly in the bass can be considered a bit annoying with the more discerning Hot/early jazz people who prefer straighter harmony and clear bass lines. GJ is not exactly the same as swing or early jazz.... or even Djangos standard practice during that era, in fact.

Otoh sure, I'm not very interested to play like Kurt Rosenwinkle, and I keep forgetting that many people are, and they would want to skip the archaic approach probably... But as you mentioned, and i totally agree, the triads might be a good first step for anything.

Sure maybe the op dude would like to play like Knut Rosenkavelier or whatever his name is. Doesn't seem likely from the players he references though. Approaches do shift from player to player, style to style.

But I don't know what advice to give other than 'go check out your favourite records.' Which I guess is what he seems to be doing, so that's great.

I have never come away from an hour or two spent working on transcription/oral learning and felt that it was time wasted. On the contrary it's always inspiring and energising.

Given it was quite common for players to learn every recorded solo by their favourite players 60 years (an easier task back then for sure but even so) I am drawn to the conclusion that people are getting lazier on this front, including yours truly.

But then information was sooooo much harder to come by. People used to actively withhold it. Now they sell it online cos they can't make ends meet with gigs.

[Hep To The Jive]

Sure maybe the op dude would like to play like Knut Rosenkavelier or whatever his name is. Doesn't seem likely from the players he references though. Approaches do shift from player to player, style to style.

Right, that's what I was goin by. He mentioned Django, Tommy Emanuel, so I figured a bit of insight into the chord tones approach is in order.

I'd love to hear Knut Rosenkavelier's take on 'I'll See You In My Dreams'. The name sounds Gypsy enough, maybe Kurt should use it as his alter ego and make a Gypsy jazz record.

[christianm77]

Right, that's what I was goin by. He mentioned Django, Tommy Emanuel, so I figured a bit of insight into the chord tones approach is in order.

I'd love to hear Knut Rosenkavelier's take on 'I'll See You In My Dreams'. The name sounds Gypsy enough, maybe Kurt should use it as his alter ego and make a Gypsy jazz record.

I dunno maybe the OP has gone through the chord tone thing .... hard to tell.

Scales def have a place.

One thing I should point out is that to my ears it's much more common in Djangos music to hear a natural 9th on the VI7 than in Charlie Parkers music. I'm not how what would work out scalewise. A lot of the time he is playing for instance Am6 on D7 in F.

[WILSON 1]

So should i treat the the first chord in a V7 to a I7 differently to a V7 to a IMaj7?

The Berklee Jazz Minor theory buts the harmonic minor on the V of the dominant chord under

conditions of resolution but without regard to harmonics; the dominant just has to resolve down a fifth.

When the dominant is static the theory puts the scale on the bII of the dominant.

As far as I can tell the Harris minor 6 scale makes no note to a condition of resolution but I have not run the theory through all its permutations.

[ragman1]

I'm sure he's a wonderful man etc etc but why do you call these scales 'Barry Harris' scales?

There's nothing new about G harm over D7. The other two, Eb and Am, are just bebop minor scales - melodic minor + passing note between 5 and 6. Why are they 'Barry Harris'?

[christianm77]

I don't think the sheet really reflects how we would tend to use them in the BH approach.... thinking in extensions, 9s, 11s isn't really the way we think about them.

[ragman1]

What does the BH approach do with these scales that is different then?

[WILSON 1]

What does the BH approach do with these scales that is different then?

Now you've got it.

The chart was just to check what tones were "hit" using Harmonic minor on the tonic of dominant or using min 6 scale on b II or V.

First thing you notice is you get an 8 tone scale.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[christianm77]

What does the BH approach do with these scales that is different then?

I'm not sure I can really express this in a sensible length post. Barry doesn't even label notes as 13ths, 9ths etc.... you can always check out Alan's book.

[ragman1]

First thing you notice is you get an 8 tone scale

Well, that's the point of a bebop scale. I was just wondering why the 'Barry Harris' label got attached to it. Bebop scales aren't particular to him, they're standard knowledge.

[WILSON 1]

Bebop scales aren't particular to him, they're standard knowledge.

But taking a bebop eight tone scale and building a "scale of chords" and borrowing WITHIN that scale to sound ALL altered chords is particular to him...although he calls it his scale (with the tongue pressed to one cheek).

That is foundational in his "school" of thought in dealing with all the harmonics.

Also, (as an aside) I wouldn't be shocked to learn of Dr. Harris's contribution to the use of the "bebop" scale as he was the roommate of Thelonious Monk and you only have to Wikipedia the Bebop Era to learn of Monks influence on that scale and its use.

[christianm77]

Ok, the bebop scale is a concept of David Baker. Never had anything to do with Barry.

Barry Harris's system for melodic scales is much more complicated involving a series of rules for whether scales are begun in the beat or off beat, chord tone or not etc.

David Baker's bebop scales are like a super simplified special case of Barrys added note rules. Undoubtedly Db was influenced by him, but Barry hates the term 'bebop scale' btw.

The maj-6 scale is only coincidentally like the 'bebop scale', so its best to completely separate the two things out in your mind imo. The other 6-dim scales are totally different to their bebop scale equivalents.

Again, there are separate melodic scales and harmonic scales in Barry's teaching and they are handled entirely differently. Horn players wouldn't even learn about the maj6 dim stuff.

This probably seems like it's skirting towards the ASD end of pedantry (and it is lol) but Barry's system is kind of too different conceptually to be just bolted onto what you already know theoretically.

Probably sounds like a cult or something :-)

[WILSON 1]

Ok, the bebop scale is a concept of David Baker. Never had anything to do with Barry.

Is there source material on this?

[joe ellipse]

If D7 goes to G7 or G 7 M you can almost play every extensions and alterations available, the limitations are the style and of course the extensions used in the chord.....

[Reg]

You need to become aware of harmonic references... of which Harmonic Min. is one.

Think of any tune as having organization... harmonic organization. The standard approach for Harmonic organization is..... Form.
When you comp.... there is much more to comping than just playing chords, but save that for later.
Anyway the chords you play need layers of organization... the simple approach is
1) the basic tonal reference of the Tune Say key of "F" for ISYIMD
The tune has a basic tonal Reference of Key of "F". (or whatever key you choose as I) That is the basic reference for all the changes to relate to, Generally Maj/Min functional Harmony in the example.

2) the next step is secondary tonal references, if your using Harmonic Minor for your source of secondary modal interchange chords,
(or borrowed), then as long as you keep the melody in the relationship... you pull chords or added notes to existing chords with that Harmonic Minor secondary tonal reference as the source.

3) the next step is smaller and shorter tonal targets.... any chord can become a tonal target, how you approach that chord, what chords and lead lines you use to set up that Tonal Target. Which should also have organization, harmonic organization.

The space, rhythmically also comes into play when comping. There are always implied Rhythmic accents, which become the Harmonic Rhythm of tunes. The groove or feel of the music. Where you play, the rhythmic attacks... in relationship to that implied Harmonic Rhythm need organization also. If you think of the implied accents, from melody or style of tune, the feel or groove of the tune as Strong beats, the weak beats can have another harmonic organization going on which can create different or reinforce the original Harmonic organization.

All these basic comping techniques all need to be organized within the FORM of the Tune. And the different micro tonal target approaches should also reflect the basic Form of the Tune.

There are standard harmonic approaches which reflect different Styles... are you aware of these concepts?

[christianm77]

Is there source material on this?

Well I've heard Barry say he hates the term 'bebop scale' in class, and afaik David Baker was the guy who popularised the term in his excellent how to play bebop books.

If you study Barry's stuff on line building and compare it to DBs stuff it's pretty apparent they are different approaches. I would say BH is further reaching, but I do appreciate the DB material.

I remember reading somewhere that DB was influenced by BH but not sure if I could track that one down myself.... anyone?

[Reg]

Isn't the BH point... it's a complete system or harmonic approach for playing standards. A system for filling in the notes besides the basic spelled chord tones using Diminished scale organization and creating tension release movement resulting in somewhat ambiguous harmony
with somewhat V I motion. As compared to using standard Harmonic functional movement derived from more implied complete Harmonic References.

Isn't DB's approach based on more traditional... Dominant chromatic functional harmonic approach for creating lines which create movement using that concept.

(very simplified explanation)

As far as D7 to G... in context of tune. Pretty standard Functional Harmony. V I , with G being a tonal target. So in traditional tern, your borrowing a type of Function, (harmonic movement), from Harmonic Minor, (not altered). The Dominant V7 to Imin from Harmonic Minor.

In jazz terms, Modal Interchange, Think in terms of Relative and Parallel... but expanded. Borrowing is expanded to Modal Interchange.

And because the tune is harmonically organized on basic Functional Harmonic Principals.... That being Major is the only reference for defining Harmonic Function... which becomes Maj/Min functional Harmony, that is the relative minor of any major, through the creation of Harmonic Minor, develops the same functional harmonic movement as Major. Tonic, subdominant and Dominant types of movement. And the majority of chord progressions and melodies from standards reflect those principles. Which can be expanded with use of borrowing and use of Relative and Parallel relationships.

Just adding notes to chord tones without Harmonic organization tends to get muddy, and the further you extend and develop those relation ships... the muddier they become.

I tend to play the D7 as a VI7 with A-7 or III- ... either being an altered II V of II , II being the target or G. And I would bring in Blues Harmony which tends to also bring in Melodic Minor... but for many gigs, I just play it straight... pulling from Harmonic Min with standard Maj/Min functional Harmony organization. Pretty vanilla and not very Blue... but still cool.

[matt.guitarteacher]

The space, rhythmically also comes into play when comping. There are always implied Rhythmic accents, which become the Harmonic Rhythm of tunes. The groove or feel of the music. Where you play, the rhythmic attacks... in relationship to that implied Harmonic Rhythm need organization also. If you think of the implied accents, from melody or style of tune, the feel or groove of the tune as Strong beats, the weak beats can have another harmonic organization going on which can create different or reinforce the original Harmonic organization.

Thanks so much for saying this enough times over the years, to the point where I finally got some of it, especially in your videos. I know it's a big part of jazz, but honestly, these concepts are huge in just surviving more mundane gigs, like what I'm more used to. There's so much juicy goodness in the cracks in between. Learning the harmonic implications of these rhythmic elements has helped me enjoy all kind of styles of music much more and greatly increased my ability to bring value as a musician to those I play with.

Gospel, for example, has a lot of this stuff. The doubletime feels CREATE the rhythmic space to open things up harmonically, all while making it actually easier to play. More traditional styles too. Much the same in jazz as well, but that's less of every day gigs for many of us. Always amazed at how these approaches make enjoyment of ALL music much more rich.

[christianm77]

Isn't the BH point... it's a complete system or harmonic approach for playing standards. A system for filling in the notes besides the basic spelled chord tones using Diminished scale organization and creating tension release movement resulting in somewhat ambiguous harmony
with somewhat V I motion. As compared to using standard Harmonic functional movement derived from more implied complete Harmonic References.

Well yes but also no.

That's about half of what he teaches - what he teaches the piano players and guitarists (harmony) - the single note stuff (improvisation) is handled separately and is less well known.

This concept of harmony being taught separately to improvisation is a source of confusion to a lot of people.

I'm taking about BH improvisation teaching and comparing it to DB. This stuff has nothing to do with the maj 6-dim scales etc.

In his improvisation teaching BH teaches a set of rules for ensuring chord tones come out on the beat as much as possible in scale use for line creation. For instance:

Add 1 or 3 extra notes when a scale descends from an odd numbered note in the dominant scale and starts on a downbeat

(The position and nature of these notes are explored - they can be chromatic passing tones, diatonic etc)

The rules seem pretty cumbersome at first but you can rapidly get a feel for them.

Hopefully you can see what DB would describe as a bebop dominant is one simple special case of this set of rules.

Learning to place chord tones on a downbeats is an important baseline skill for harmonic improvisers to develop. In actual music, things can be much freer and you would want to be able to break the rules for effect.

[Reg]

Hey Christian...

Thanks... I believe there are methods of organization which create guidelines... for example, what notes are available when using a D7 chord.
Are you hinting that the organization is different between improvisation and comping.

The rhythmic thing is personally more of an application organization, where to use.... (whatever organization one decides is right for use in a musical context, a tune etc...)

Isn't the choice of what melodic or harmonic material used... more than application? Obviously in the tune ISYIMD, most guitarist think Gypsy swing, which has very Harmonic implications... but if the tune is performed in a different style, the harmonic implication change... resulting in different note choices for what to use in relationship to the D7.

Context and understanding what Harmonic and Melodic references are... generally result in how to organize the fill-in notes in rhythmic organizational applications. Of course... anything can work anywhere.

I could get into the nuts and bolts... but no one really cares... so again thanks.

Hey Matt hope all is well, that sound great. It's not a bad thing to actually enjoy playing music, I still do very much so.

It does seem to take 4 or 5 years for much of what I try and talk about on this forum to begin to come to light... but nothing wrong with that.

[cosmic gumbo]

Jazz Technobabble

[Reg]

Jazz Technobabble

LOL... that's good.

[christianm77]

Hey Christian...

Thanks... I believe there are methods of organization which create guidelines... for example, what notes are available when using a D7 chord.
Are you hinting that the organization is different between improvisation and comping.

It's not a hint - I'm saying it outright as clear as I can lol. It's a basic feature of Barry's teaching. Harmony class is separate from improvisation.

There are deeper connections but all that 8 note scale stuff? It's for chords not lines. Improv teaching is principally about developing idiomatic bebop lines from seven note scales and the (particularly dominant, what you'd call mixolydian) with chromatic embellishments and passing tones as required.

The rhythmic thing is personally more of an application organization, where to use.... (whatever organization one decides is right for use in a musical context, a tune etc...)

Isn't the choice of what melodic or harmonic material used... more than application? Obviously in the tune ISYIMD, most guitarist think Gypsy swing, which has very Harmonic implications... but if the tune is performed in a different style, the harmonic implication change... resulting in different note choices for what to use in relationship to the D7.

Context and understanding what Harmonic and Melodic references are... generally result in how to organize the fill-in notes in rhythmic organizational applications. Of course... anything can work anywhere.

Stylistic harmonic considerations used to bug me a lot more. Truth is anything sounds like gypsy jazz when you play it a Selmer Macaferri with lots of pick attack. A lot of the sound of that music is also in the phrasing, and when you play with that type of rhythm section it becomes quite instinctive. Rhythm guitar and staccato bass as opposed to ride cymbal and legato walking bass .... there is some room for crossover of course. I think I make a decision of how to feel a tune when playing with just bass for instance.

There are some things I think i do change style to style - the melodic contour of the GJ I would say is more clarinet like - lots of sweeping triad arps.

When you play bop it's more like a sax, everything squeezed into a smaller range. Things don't swoop around so much. More scale steps, arps tend to one octave rather than two or three.

That's kind of how I think of it. Harmonically I'm probably making subconscious decisions too but who knows?

But then it all gets mashed up. I guess that's part of what having a style is lol