Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 40 of 40
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    Hi. Does anyone have a complete system of creating upper structures to recommend? I mean 3 notes voicings. I base my chord play on drop2. I wanted to systematize my learning and I am looking for solutions for upper srructures. Has anyone found anything interesting and worth recommending in this regard?

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Jordan Klemons in my opinion has a great system using upper structure triads. The format and his teaching style works great for me. Jordan I believe is a member here as well.

    www.nycjazzguitarmasterclasses.com

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Mark Levine's book has a chapter explaining upper structures, but it's not really a system for learning to apply them to guitar.

    Still, there's enough there to get into it.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Fareed Haque's Jazz Comping course is about guide tones + extensions. Guide tones are played in the middle strings so they sort of correspond to those drop 2 voicings where 3 and 7 are in the middle:

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jrev808925
    Jordan Klemons in my opinion has a great system using upper structure triads. The format and his teaching style works great for me. Jordan I believe is a member here as well.

    www.nycjazzguitarmasterclasses.com
    Jordan's approach is a great way to go.

  7. #6
    Thank You for all answers. There is a Hope...

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Randy Vincent's 'Three-Notes voicings and Beyond' has a chapter about it... and considering what you are asking it has lots of info about various Three-Notes voicings derived with different approaches and their applications.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    One simple approach to use, if starting from drop 2 voicings is the following:
    Drop 2 is 1 3 5 7. Change it into, and practice separately:

    1257
    1347
    1247

    These are easy to visualize on the fretboard if one is familiar with the drop 2 voicings as a starting point. You adjust the tensions depending on chord scale. If you analyze the voicings that result, you get all the extensions, you also get quartal voicings, triads over various bass notes, basically most applicable voicings on the guitar. It is really a theoretical simplification of the Mick Goodrick voicing method.

  10. #9
    Alter, thanks for the great tip. I'm looking for something like that. I am behind it to try to simplify everything and make it more enjoyable to use and learn. Your proposal seems to be.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    If you like to stare into the Abyss, this pdf is fun:

    Guitar - Ben Monder - Practice Sheet.pdf | Harmony | Chord (Music)
    Attached Images Attached Images

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Ben Monder, what a monster player! This is work that can take months to master, but will transform ones knowledge of the fretboard. Especially when you expand triads into 7th chords, and start to connect the inversions going up and down various scales... instant late Coltrane material!

  13. #12
    This PDF of Ben Monder is impressive! Is there a doctor in the room Is this an exercise for exercise? Does it teach making music? How to use it in a musical context? Mastering this material takes many months or years of practice. Probably a little shorter on the piano ... But we all know how demanding a guitar is. After reading this material, I understood even more how little I know and can do.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    If you like to stare into the Abyss, this pdf is fun:

    Guitar - Ben Monder - Practice Sheet.pdf | Harmony | Chord (Music)
    yeh... but geneally speaking it is all derivable...

    I am always tempted to do something like that when I 'unlock' some approach for myself... but always too lazy and too impatient... and I end with occasionally practicing just this or that...))

    I never was able to be that consistent....

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    If you like to stare into the Abyss, this pdf is fun:

    Guitar - Ben Monder - Practice Sheet.pdf | Harmony | Chord (Music)
    That is a frightening amount of work and I say this as someone who plays major 3rds tuning. I know my tuning simplifies things a lot but even then.. Holy moly. Oh well, no room to complain I guess!

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    I first saw this document 7 years ago and had that reaction...

    I'd say I can do quite a lot of it now, albeit not all internalised into my playing 100%. One step at a time mounts up.

    And, plus, it's not actually linear. It's like learning tunes. Your 200th tune comes easier than your 1st.

    You learn as much how to learn and work methodically through voicings as learn a stack of voicings. It's one thing doing an intervallic voicing through a mode never having done it and another to do a new one after having done a quite few of them. Probably if you get through everything on the pdf you'll be able to do it on the fly.

    (Also as a friend once said, that document basically IS Ben Monder.)

    I DON'T think you need to know all this to be a jazz guitarist. But it's amazing what you can build up if you feed it regular little bits of time everyday.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    If you like to stare into the Abyss, this pdf is fun:

    Guitar - Ben Monder - Practice Sheet.pdf | Harmony | Chord (Music)
    An infinite number of specific things to get in your mind and under your fingers. But, we're musicians, so we take them one at a time.

    Take every one of those Cmaj7 voicings through the Cmajor scale. Then 8 specific additional chord types. Then an unspecified number of substituting 2s and 4s into the types. All possible string combinations. And, although he didn't mention it, I'm guessing it might be good to do in all 12 keys.

    Then, there's moving every possible triad through 3 different scales. 12 keys.

    Then, for 10 different chords, learn an average of 5 or 6 different names for each and do that in 12 keys. This is any easy one, because it's only about 700 things to know, which is easier than some of the other stuff.

    You have a good shot at getting all this down, provided you believe in reincarnation, and you're right about it.

    Some number of lives down the line, you get to work on the arps on the last page.

    And, after that, if you're still interested in music, you can learn some tunes. At that point, you can start eliminating all the voicings you now know but don't sound good, are too hard to play, or you just can't figure out how to use them to enhance a tune. Maybe it would be better just to figure out nice chord melodies on your own and learn the voicings you like.

    That said, I do think it's worthwhile to know how to move triads or larger chords through scales. But, the way I see it, getting even one sequence under your fingers to the point where you can apply it to a tune, in any key, on a gig, is hours of work. That is, starting with only one voicing, moving through the major scale, and then getting it down in 12 keys is a lot of work. Ben Monder is talking about doing that for an uncountable number of voicings.

    I've seen recommendations like this before. One post, lifetimes of work, after which you still don't know any tunes.

    Just out of curiousity, what is the Berklee standard for this sort of thing? How is it taught there?

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I first saw this document 7 years ago and had that reaction...

    I'd say I can do quite a lot of it now, albeit not all internalised into my playing 100%. One step at a time mounts up.

    And, plus, it's not actually linear. It's like learning tunes. Your 200th tune comes easier than your 1st.

    You learn as much how to learn and work methodically through voicings as learn a stack of voicings. It's one thing doing an intervallic voicing through a mode never having done it and another to do a new one after having done a quite few of them. Probably if you get through everything on the pdf you'll be able to do it on the fly.

    (Also as a friend once said, that document basically IS Ben Monder.)

    I DON'T think you need to know all this to be a jazz guitarist. But it's amazing what you can build up if you feed it regular little bits of time everyday.
    You know... for me funny thing is that when I start to play tunes I rarely use that stuff -- it is strange but it is often that when I practice or do some 'free noodling' I can use it a lot... but when I play real tunes I do not feel I need it... with tunes I have very integral feeling ... and these things often go across ny inner hearing... I often use very limited and very conventional stuff just focusing on staying melodically authentic... and probably dropping out everything that makes an obstacle to it

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    You know... for me funny thing is that when I start to play tunes I rarely use that stuff -- it is strange but it is often that when I practice or do some 'free noodling' I can use it a lot... but when I play real tunes I do not feel I need it... with tunes I have very integral feeling ... and these things often go across ny inner hearing... I often use very limited and very conventional stuff just focusing on staying melodically authentic... and probably dropping out everything that makes an obstacle to it
    I’ve had most success using new voicings etc in arrangements until they become part of my playing. In the end I take individual voicings I like and use them.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I’ve had most success using new voicings etc in arrangements until they become part of my playing. In the end I take individual voicings I like and use them.
    Yes, I see what you mean... it is the way.
    I have problems with making arrangements of jazz stuff (I can do arrangements - I did a lot of classical music transcriptions and quite tricky ones where yu had to add a lot or to drop out a lot)...
    Basically.. I learn the tune, I learn the changes... and then I sort of improvize, noodle around ... not quite of arrangement but I add some ideas conciously to check them but mostly it is very much led by melodic movement... I feel it like I am trying to fumble the way - every next time a bit differently...
    So I keep a lot of 'a choice on the spot' approach...

    But disatvantage is that often there is not time to apply new concepts that way... I generally move around the same routes just walking a bit away.
    But maybe it is ok for me? In general I am a persona that likes to turn around the same plot, idea, image again and againg... so meaybe it is ok...


    I tried to force myself making complete arrangement of standards but it does not work for me... I just get bored quickly...

    and also I notice that I often am not happy with the things that many others seem to be happy with .. I often see many accomplished solo guitar players - very smooth and all... but I also realize that with all my admiration this is not what i want to do... and I come back to my blind fumbling.. eventually i seem to have come at peace wit hmyself - that it would rather be awkward, with faults but that way... then clean and smooth but the others' way (however pretentious it may seem)

    though I agree that it slows my development... but I am not really ambitious.

    Sometimes when I play in real time playing I hear like i want to do something but I can't - this is where I clearly understand the disatavantages of my process.

    But I also notice that finding my way out of it on the spot (even if I have to stop for it) is extremely effective for the future practice...

    when I hear something and have to figure out how to make it turns out more effective way for me for future playing than when I find new abstract idea and try to incoroporate it into music
    Last edited by Jonah; 07-22-2020 at 06:00 AM.

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    I really think the porous nature of the divide between composition and improv is a bit overlooked.

    (One of my aims is to get rid of this divide in my own playing. But that’s another subject.)

    Arranging tunes has always been central to jazz. Composition and arrangement is a really valid way to work on improvisation and vice versa.

    Non notated music is always a ‘black box’; the process is not obvious right away, And in jazz that’s a real spectrum, from pure improv to worked out set pieces and arrangements.

    we put this all under the umbrella ‘improvisation’ ...
    Last edited by christianm77; 07-22-2020 at 08:22 AM.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I really think the porous nature of the divide between composition and improv is a bit overlooked.

    (One of my aims is to get rid of this divide in my own playing. But that’s another subject.)

    Arranging tunes has always been central to jazz. Composition and arrangement is a really valid way to work on improvisation and vice versa.

    Non notated music is always a ‘black box’; the process is not obvious right away, And in jazz that’s a real spectrum, from pure improv to worked out set pieces and arrangements.

    we put this all under the umbrella ‘improvisation’ ...
    You shift it a bit in the perspective of general discusiion (style, history, education, common practice) which is in this particular case out of interest to me as in this particular case only my personal feeling of the proper process makes real sense to me (which does not exclude listening to others and trying what they do).

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    I really think the porous nature of the divide between composition and improv is a bit overlooked.
    I have a close friend who is brilliant classical improvizer (and has been since he was 13-14), he always had compositional ambitions and he composed and does compose now... but it is very obvious that his real thing is improvization.

    It is sort of personal modus operandi/vivend/creandi

    Most of stuff being composed in jazz I do not cosider true composition - it is rather a continuation of improvizational mentality for me

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    You shift it a bit in the perspective of general discusiion (style, history, education, common practice) which is in this particular case out of interest to me as in this particular case only my personal feeling of the proper process makes real sense to me (which does not exclude listening to others and trying what they do).
    I think ‘proper process’ starts with the music; as you indicated. The theoretical stuff comes in later when you have the musical chops to make it into music.

    But; as a basic set of exercises Monder’s syllabus can be used over the long term to develop a stronger command of fretboard harmony. the only thing I’d say is don’t mistake this for actually learning to play jazz haha; OTOH if you can basically play jazz voicings are a nice resource.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    I have a close friend who is brilliant classical improvizer (and has been since he was 13-14), he always had compositional ambitions and he composed and does compose now... but it is very obvious that his real thing is improvization.

    It is sort of personal modus operandi/vivend/creandi

    Most of stuff being composed in jazz I do not cosider true composition - it is rather a continuation of improvizational mentality for me
    I’ve never been comfortable calling myself a ‘composer’ for that reason. I know some actual composers and I can’t do that thing they can. I couldn’t write a convincing sonata for example.

    So, we have to accept some basic terminology to be able to discuss these things at all; but the terms are inadequate if only because they are often borrowed and repurposed from Western music.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Which is to say the dictionary definition of improvisation doesn’t really describe what Miles, Oscar, Louis etc were doing EITHER

    ‘something that is improvised, in particular a piece of music, drama, etc. created spontaneously or without preparation.’

    We are stuck with these words, but we have to realise they are inaccurate (like ‘solo’, ‘transcription’ and so on); or that they at least have a different meaning in jazz (like ‘dominant seventh chord’ and ‘ii V’)

  27. #26

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    But; as a basic set of exercises Monder’s syllabus can be used over the long term to develop a stronger command of fretboard harmony.
    Absolutely

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Which is to say the dictionary definition of improvisation doesn’t really describe what Miles, Oscar, Louis etc were doing EITHER

    ‘something that is improvised, in particular a piece of music, drama, etc. created spontaneously or without preparation.’

    We are stuck with these words, but we have to realise they are inaccurate. See also ‘solo’, ‘transcription’ and so on
    Oh i do not really want to dive into 'what the improvization really is' ... I wrote a few time on this forum that I think to answer this question we should take in consideration 'listner's perception' (even if we speak about performer/improvizer we should consider him as a listner).
    Because improvization does not depend that much on concious intention.
    It is very contextual culturally what and why we hear things as improvized or not, and that affects us as performing improvizers.

    For me as a player the most important feeling is the sense of memonetary choice and creation... more deeply it is the extremely direct feeling of time flow that makes time almost totally stop..

    I call it sometimes: experiencing life direcectly. The rest of my activity (for a few exceptions)) seems bleak and fake imitation of life.

    And - which is interesting - it may happen even in classicla piece learnt and played note for note... I would say even more I have particular pleasure in playing baroque piece without a single extra embelishment but still feeling that I improvize)))

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    Oh i do not really want to dive into 'what the improvization really is' ... I wrote a few time on this forum that I think to answer this question we should take in consideration 'listner's perception' (even if we speak about performer/improvizer we should consider him as a listner).
    Because improvization does not depend that much on concious intention.
    It is very contextual culturally what and why we hear things as improvized or not, and that affects us as performing improvizers.
    My solution to this is pretty practical. I don’t care.

    I don’t actually give a rats bottom about improvisation: my base level aim is to get students to do something that sounds idiomatic and swinging and hear what they are playing.

    improvisation is only an issue if you spend your life learning music from scores in a formally pedagogical environment. In contrast there’s good reason to regard it as a natural outgrowth of the aural tradition, self directed learning and the needs of a practical musical environment.

    It will normally happen as a product of the way the human mind works. It’s really a hang up if people who grew up learning music from scores; and with the idea of there being a definitive text. If you get them out of that and into an aural approach, improvisation is an extension of this. Story telling, not writing a novel.

    (at some point someone is going to invoke Bill Evans haha; I don’t disagree with him (!) but I do think an over emphasis on improvisational process is unhelpful in the short run.)

    For me as a player the most important feeling is the sense of memonetary choice and creation... more deeply it is the extremely direct feeling of time flow that makes time almost totally stop,
    And - which is interesting - it may happen even in classicla piece learnt and played note for note... I would say even more I have particular pleasure in playing baroque piece without a single extra embelishment but still feeling that I improvize
    i think that’s called ‘actually making music’

  30. #29

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    Absolutely
    Please take this as a serious question ... How?

    I can't figure out how one can tackle Monder's prescription. It's an overwhelming amount of material and it doesn't offer any prioritization. More concerning, is that it barely addresses application.

    I agree with those who suggest that the way to learn this material is through chord melody -- and I'd add sophisticated comping. That way, when you learn a voicing, you're learning a contextualized sound, which gives you a chance to use it in another situation.

    And, for the underlying mechanics, I think it makes sense to approach it something like this:

    1. Learn the notes on the fingerboard -- cold.

    2. Learn how chords are constructed and named.

    3. Make it a goal to know the names of the notes in the chords you use. Automatic, and in all keys. You already know where they are.

    4. Start with C7. Play it everywhere on the neck you can. Then, notice that you can turn C7 into every other chord with a C root by adjusting/adding one or more notes. Then, all 12 keys.

    5. Put your Gm7s together with your C7s and your Fmaj7s and find the smoothly voice led ii V Is.

    At this point you have pretty good command of the fingerboard for comping and chord melody. Time for tunes. Watch youtube videos of good players comping through tunes. You already have enough information to figure out what they're doing.

    6. Don't forget that you can use fragments of chords and even single notes, while comping. It may help to begin to visualize them with the grips you know, but you don't have to do it that way. You just need that automatic knowedge of the chord tones you want to play in the next beat of the tune and where they are.

    7. Then, mine the world of jazz for interesting reharmonizations of tunes.

    This is a lot of work. But it's not infinite. I'd say a couple of years of concerted effort bolstered by plenty of time playing tunes in groups. Also, after the initial investment in basic fretboard knowledge, it's all about music.

    I'd argue that you don't need to know all those synonyms for chord names. You just need to know how to add alterations to chords and what they sound like in the context of a tune.

  31. #30

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Please take this as a serious question ... How?

    I can't figure out how one can tackle Monder's prescription. It's an overwhelming amount of material and it doesn't offer any prioritization. More concerning, is that it barely addresses application.

    I agree with those who suggest that the way to learn this material is through chord melody -- and I'd add sophisticated comping. That way, when you learn a voicing, you're learning a contextualized sound, which gives you a chance to use it in another situation.

    And, for the underlying mechanics, I think it makes sense to approach it something like this:

    1. Learn the notes on the fingerboard -- cold.

    2. Learn how chords are constructed and named.

    3. Make it a goal to know the names of the notes in the chords you use. Automatic, and in all keys. You already know where they are.

    4. Start with C7. Play it everywhere on the neck you can. Then, notice that you can turn C7 into every other chord with a C root by adjusting/adding one or more notes. Then, all 12 keys.

    5. Put your Gm7s together with your C7s and your Fmaj7s and find the smoothly voice led ii V Is.

    At this point you have pretty good command of the fingerboard for comping and chord melody. Time for tunes. Watch youtube videos of good players comping through tunes. You already have enough information to figure out what they're doing.

    6. Don't forget that you can use fragments of chords and even single notes, while comping. It may help to begin to visualize them with the grips you know, but you don't have to do it that way. You just need that automatic knowedge of the chord tones you want to play in the next beat of the tune and where they are.

    7. Then, mine the world of jazz for interesting reharmonizations of tunes.

    This is a lot of work. But it's not infinite. I'd say a couple of years of concerted effort bolstered by plenty of time playing tunes in groups. Also, after the initial investment in basic fretboard knowledge, it's all about music.

    I'd argue that you don't need to know all those synonyms for chord names. You just need to know how to add alterations to chords and what they sound like in the context of a tune.

    Personally... I am not much into that 'learn all in all keys', 'learn all the chords in all inversions' stuff etc. Though i admit it is needed...
    And this systemized point by point agenda is also not for me...

    I always did a bit of that and a bit of this.. and the somehow eventually I get the feeling of the whole picture... there are 'blind spots' and 'gaps' but it is ok... they will come into focus one day... this concerns other ares too.. not only guitar playing.

    I like to do what makes me happy... I like process... I am not much into 'hard work' to achieve the goal.... My goal is being happy here and now ... more or less.

    Though I admit that some basic routine should be done of course, and some idscipline is needed.


    As for Ben Monder's sheet... it is exactly what it is... you know in baroque times they liked to make sort of Labyrinths... it was particular fun to put everything in one model - so that if you can properly use it you can get access to any knowledge in the area.
    It reflected that era's interest to practical mechanism combined with extreme supernatural fantasies.

    Ben's list is not a prescription it is that kind of sheet that you can turn upside down if you need and derive sonething to practice with... I am sure it does not presume that linear deligent learning... or not... it does presume it too if one is crazy enough for that... why not?

    But for me it is something you do not read fronm left to right , and from up and downwards in literal sense...


    PS
    Some time ago I watched Bill Frisell's interview.. where he was asked what he does for practice... he said: you know... yesteday I tried to play pentatonics with one extra note ... it was interesting... I like doing things like that.... etc. Bill is acconplished musician in his 60s and he tried to play pentatonics plus 1 note a few days ago...

    It is just an approach... we live today in the world where pragmatism became casual mentality: people want to secure that they are really ready for something, that they are done with something.... 'I will do this and that and I will become this and that' - No.
    People believe in professionalis: 'I will apply to professional and he will solve the problem' - No. At best he usually can advise something... you have to solve it yourself (even most of causal medical problems... )

    There are things and areas which are not about it at all.

    My friend says: if after 30 you are not a doctor for yourself you really do not know yourself at all... I would say the same thing approximately about guitar... if after a few years of playing (adult) you're not a teacher for youself ---
    Last edited by Jonah; 07-23-2020 at 02:51 PM.

  32. #31

    User Info Menu

    I generally approach by understanding the organization of the system being applied, which usually then just requires the technique to be able to apply.

    as far as the Moulder’s basic almost cst approach to organizing chord structures and voicing, that’s kind of basic musicianship... I mean when you’re starting to play a style of music, you should at least learn the basics of the musical components from which the style uses. Then the application of deriving voicings through a simple organization of realizing Yada Yada...
    I mean, this Is simple To notate out and understand, then the realizing on guitar can become difficult depending on your technical fretboard organization and your skill level.

    the upper structure thing...What organization do you want to use for “the upper structures “
    triads...7th chords etc... you need source for creating and organizing the pitch sets. Then a application for using... personally these types of voicing creation systems... after you get past the “wow” of 1st few hearings... become boring and not very useful, on guitar. Great for worked out prearranged compositions...rehearsed performance etc...

    What can become useful is using the approach To help expand what you play... for example when most jazz players see a chord, they generally relate that chord to tonal reference with context...which then allows that chord to become a chord pattern, which also implies that chord and it’s tonal implication in that context. And when your able to use the “upper structure voicings” to expand the “chord pattern”, while still keeping the tonal implications and context intact.... Well now your playing as compared to throwing in some cool or hip BS that is at best an embellishment etc.

    I use to call this the plug and play approach . You develop collections of voicings that you don’t need to think about, Almost like licks, chord licks that can use in real time below a lead line. And like knowing the concept or organization that chord tones work over the implied chord... you now have an expanded organization of chord tones.

    This is just the beginning, right, you then develop different versions of your chord patterns, which can have variations of The basic starting chord, which becomes a tonal target with functional context...which can be used,expanded, adapted etc..in real time...the improv thing.

  33. #32

    User Info Menu

    I don't see the connection between Monder's pdf and CST.

    Basically, Monder is recommending knowing every possible way to play every possible chord and knowing every possible name for each one. Well, close to that, anyway.

  34. #33

    User Info Menu

    He says....take all chords that you can create from maj, harmonic min and meodic min. And be able to play any voicing from those chords derived from the scales...any way and anywhere on the guitar.

    the same source for chord construction at beginning stages of cst.
    cst then actually gets into the possibilities of how to use chords in context.

    voicings don.t have much to do with theory... they’re just personal choices of performance....or if you want to get into basic non jazz contrapuntal organization

  35. #34

    User Info Menu

    I heard Jim Hall with Don Thompson and a drummer at the Keystone Korner in SF years ago.

    Jim didn't use all that many different chord grips. I remember being surprised at how much he used x5666x for different harmonies.

    Guitar has progressed since then. I get that.

    But, my guess is that it is still more efficient to learn grips in the context of songs, not a massive isolated-from-tunes effort at memorizing grips. This applies to the more advanced player -- the novice needs to have some vocabulary to get onto this path.

    You're probably better off learning 8 ways to apply a chord you know, than learning 7 more chords.

    Learning chord melody is a great way to do this. Because it's usually oriented toward finding different ways to navigate through a tune harmonically, typically with attention to the voice leading. You learn the mechanical part of it mated with the sound of each element. You can apply the new voices to comping immediately. The sounds inform your soloing and, if you analyze what's going on, you can support your efforts to reproduce those sounds by naming them.

    Years ago Carl Barry told me that Chuck Wayne would try to solo on every chord in his chord melody version of a tune. Not just the basic changes, but all of his elaborations.

  36. #35

    User Info Menu

    Guitar has progressed since then. I get that.
    I don't think such things are subject to progress really...

  37. #36
    I did not think that my innocent question would cause such an interesting discussion. Very nice

  38. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by freud
    I did not think that my innocent question would cause such an interesting discussion. Very nice
    You're freud... innocence, questions and their consequences must be your specialization.

  39. #38

    User Info Menu

    Sometimes a D major triad is just a D major triad

  40. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Sometimes a D major triad is just a D major triad
    Don't judge the triads by their looks. Let them sound and express their inner essence.

  41. #40

    User Info Menu

    Yea getting back to the upper structure thing... Freud... was is the goal of using this type of harmonic or melodic organization.
    The Molder page is just a technical study with organization for creation and then actual technical fretboard awareness etc...
    Boston back in the 7p’s
    You said upper structure... which in jazz tends to imply piano voicing things generally from arranging practice... same with your drop 2 voicings.

    But basically you can take any bass line, both root motion or melodic bass or lower voiced line and keep that line or root motion... Diatonic. Then use a two or three note voicing on top of that lower or bass line. Think of McCoy 4th voicings. You can have diatonic constant structure voicings on top or even use some real constant structure 4th voicings to make the sound more fun. When I was back in Boston as kid we use to play the 4th and 9th games with any aspect of playing we could...even melodically using 4ths as organization for getting out tonally. I actually had conversations with Michael Brecker about melodic development concepts...the hard part is always being able to perform, the actual playing thing. This can get really forced and vanilla sounding without something to give it life. If your performing for musicians or some of the few jazz fans left... can reallyA piano be fun.

    Anyway that’s the basic concept... two musical parts like contrapuntal organization.. without all the traditional guideline BS.

    Another approach is using modern Blues concepts... jazz blues concepts with organization of again two parts. Usually again more in a piano style. The bass or lower reference line moves to the top and the voicing is the lower part becomes the upper structure aspect.
    That upper line uses Blue note aspects of organization...which result of being able to stand on it’s own harmonically and the voicings can use different harmonic organization.

    This is how I’ve comped for most of my life... you can develop voicings Patterns that imply chord patterns... which give you many more options of what the tonal target of the voicing
    Pattern can imply.
    If this sound like something you might be interested in, we can keep going...or not.
    Im good whatever