The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 26 to 50 of 50
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    ....Hi, Hubert!

    It's an English expression, which can be used negatively.....ie to say that someone is behaving in a way you don't like, OR, as I used it, to express affection for someone's behaviour or character........that is, I don't understand everything, but it's not a problem. I enjoy your posts immensely, so do please continue.

    You can listen to BBC Radio 4 on the net...if you have a slow connection, they do 'podcasts' (each about 20MB in mp3 format, lasting half-an-hour) which you can download to your hard drive, and listen to over and over to help you with English. Click 'podcasts', located on the homepage screen.

    Lots there for reading, also.

    Sometimes the 'afternoon play' is very good...the speed of the speech is usually much slower than in news broadcasts. (Regular listening is a great way to learn......that's how I learned Polish. It doesn't seem that you are learning, but you are). Worth having a look if you haven't already. You need 'Real Player' to listen live (free to download).

    PS....Check also BBC Radio Three for - 'Classical, JAZZ, World, Arts, Drama'.....beats TV anyday!

    www.bbc.co.uk/radio4
    Last edited by wordsmith; 05-21-2009 at 07:03 PM. Reason: add a PS

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27
    (Regular listening is a great way to learn......that's how I learned Polish. It doesn't seem that you are learning, but you are).

    This strikes me as another point in common between learning a language and learning jazz improv.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    There are many similarities also between music and writing.......the written story is the played tune, paragraphs the sections of the tune, sentences the phrasing and words the chords and notes, perhaps?
    Both stories and tunes start with an introduction, giving us an idea of what is to come, or something deceptive. All things conclude, very often in a story to do with something from the opening scene - a tonic chord?

    My study of music has in fact helped my writing - if I write according to the theory of music, I get more interesting material.....inversions (a twist in the tale), dissonance (a certain momentary ugliness which makes sense later).....all sorts of stuff.

    Mainly for me, the rhythms of the written word are extremely important, and the crescendo is a very effective element. So....rhythm and dynamics - the driving forces of both writing and music.

    I'll stop here....there's no end!

  5. #29
    Oh yes, I agree with all of that as well. But that's more of a comparison of the parallels between literature and narrative structure and musical structure. (And there certainly IS a great deal of commonality).

    I was just thinking about language acquisition and learning to improvise as as form of language acquisition. Nothing new or original, but I like to think of ways that can be applied to music. For example, it's pretty clear that learning a language is much, much harder if is treated as cold exercises that are never applied on a day to day basis. I think the same is true of jazz or music improvisation in general. You have to go ahead and play right away and as often as possible interact with people who speak the language.

    Immersing oneself in the culture is essential and listening and repeating (basically, transcription) is very important as well.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    I think one of the most striking things I've seen on this was by Scott Henderson. Youtube one of his instructional vids, it's about phrasing, where he draws paralels between language (writing) and musical phrasing.

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719
    Oh yes, I agree with all of that as well. But that's more of a comparison of the parallels between literature and narrative structure and musical structure. (And there certainly IS a great deal of commonality).

    I was just thinking about language acquisition and learning to improvise as as form of language acquisition. Nothing new or original, but I like to think of ways that can be applied to music. For example, it's pretty clear that learning a language is much, much harder if is treated as cold exercises that are never applied on a day to day basis. I think the same is true of jazz or music improvisation in general. You have to go ahead and play right away and as often as possible interact with people who speak the language.

    Immersing oneself in the culture is essential and listening and repeating (basically, transcription) is very important as well.

    What is common and what is commonality. I'd like a moment to add to
    yours and Wordsmith posts.
    One can learn a language by reading each letter and making the lettered
    group a word. It seems a long and hard road. Languages come most easily
    when thrown into the "no choice" of immersion. Most ear training seems to
    take the notion that each letter is important and at some future time all'
    these letters will spell a word and then the letters of the next word will
    ad infinitum create a sentence, etc. All the intervals, all the arpeggios, all
    the scales "sound" the music. But its not music, it's the "SYNTAX" or the
    mode of connection.
    My ear "stinks", no perfect, no relative pitch. People are born with perfect
    pitch (Oliver Sacks...Book..MUSICOPHILIA..Tales of Music and the Brain
    (a neuroscientist and music affeciando). Relative pitch can be learned but
    is it really necessary. Useful, yes.
    Many great jazz musicians required their cohorts to be "able to sing". Ellington wouldn't hire anybody if he couldn't sing. Herb Ellis.."if you
    can't sing it, don't play it. George Benson plays beautifully, because
    he sings his lines...Slam Stewart, ad infinitum, again. Point is do we
    want to recognize intervals or arpeggios or do we want our instrument
    to SING FOR US. I would choose the latter.
    Returning to language. We pointed to immersion in BBC broadcasts. Well
    that's exactly it. For BBC substitute..all the spare time, or anytime you are listening to music SING WHAT YOU HEAR. You can't do this haphazardly ...COMMIT with EACH NOTE. That means SING OUT, don't be shy and don't be self conscious. So you played a "bad note" . You'll never learn without
    stumbling either with a language or with music. My voice stinks. I can
    carry a tune but noone would want to listen to me. SCAT CONSTANTLY.
    that's practice when your not with the instrument.

    This isn't meant to slam the didactic...but it is too slow for some us. Some
    of us are even running out of time.

    Then when you've started to SCAT and feel not totally "out to lunch"
    sing your scales with solfeggio. Learn the chromatic solfeg scale tones,
    both up and down because, like enharmonics, they are a bit different.
    Good practice book: Thom Mason the ART of HEARING...USC Thornton
    School of Music. In a year he has his students singing thru the changes
    of Giant Steps. He was at Dick Grove when I was there at 40yrs old in
    1983.

    I'm taking lessons now...am 67 yrs old w/ 3 college degrees...and hardly any didactic experience in music, 9 months at a Dick Grove School in Los
    Angeles. It was one of the great experiences of my life. He viewed music
    in a totally different way. Back to current lessons...my teacher (3 yrs
    Berklee, 7 yrs Music Institute, and 3 yrs at Dick Grove) employs the
    same methodolgy as Dick (tho Dick was a piano player). There are 5 scale
    positions. Each is shaped so that the solfegg tones are apparent in each
    shape. You must spend time away from the instrument VISUALIZING each
    shape, defining all the tones around it and then linking the solfegg to
    each string and then string fingerings , each in their different position,
    the solfegg is always the same thru each pattern.

    EX: all C Major scales are fingered in all 5 positions with these sequences:
    1.2.4 again 1.2.4. 1.3.4 again 1.3.4 ...2 notes on the next string...1.2.4
    again. Take C Major scale @ fret 3. Start all scales with finger 2 or 4 only.
    and no stretching. 6th string 2 Noter (G the 5th and A the 6th) all 2 Noter
    are SO and LA resp. 5th string 1.2.4. thats (B C D) TI DO RE...4th String
    1.2.4fingering (EFG) MI FA SO...3rd String 1.3.4.(ABC) LA TI DO..
    2nd string 1.3.4.(DEF) RE MI FA The second string requires an ascending SHIFT up in position due to tuning constraints not 4th but a 3rd and finally
    1st String in this position the 2 Noter repeats.
    Everytime you finger any string with the first 1.2.4 it is always TI.DO.RE.
    similarly the 2nd 1.2.4 is always MI.FA.SO.
    This seems terribly complicated at first but it really is very logical
    and "stabilizes" the sounds on the fretboard. Which for me, has been the
    key to getting a grasp on the instrument.

    Now if and when you sing your lines while you play them, the solfegg falls into place.

    This methodology is dependent on 2 factors: the symmetric nature of the
    guitar tuning and the unsymmetric 2-3 string interface. Plus the fact that
    every MAJOR scale has 2 1/2 steps which define the placement of the
    scale during a "CADENCE"....FA goes down to MI (IV goes to I Maj)
    and TI goes to DO (V7 goes to I )

    This is probably much more than anyone wants to digest. I will stop here.
    If anyone is intrigued, please pick up the thread. Everyone seems to have their own answer. Everyone thinks theirs is the only way. These are thoughts/and some truths, that even if one doesn't want to follow to
    the end are worth noting.

    For those who survived the "tome". Thanks for reading thru it.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    yeah, you got it
    "the voice stinks" - scat - and solfeggio
    please tell us what you're really meaning.
    The attempt was to think ... about the voice, correct?
    there's nothing else.
    No do re mi fa so la ti do
    sorry
    it's only a two Eu-voting cents - sorry
    but I would appreciate to hear what you might be saying.

    happy birthday

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    otherwise dear francoforte will do it...

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    must it be Scott Henderson??
    Or Händel?
    nothing left behind "Johann Sebastian Bach"
    U understand?

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by hubert54
    yeah, you got it
    "the voice stinks" - scat - and solfeggio
    please tell us what you're really meaning.
    The attempt was to think ... about the voice, correct?
    there's nothing else.
    No do re mi fa so la ti do
    sorry
    it's only a two Eu-voting cents - sorry
    but I would appreciate to hear what you might be saying.

    happy birthday
    I'm saying too much.But.
    Singing along with everything you hear and trying to copy that melody,copy that phrase and inflection. Away from the instrument. Thats how a child
    learns language. That is the "natural" way to learn music. USE the voice
    don't think about the voice. SCAT the exact phrase you hear this will
    train your ear. Find the phrase and you might then turn off/down the
    music. Try to sing it..try to find it. Duplication is closer to the natural learning process. Sing OUT. Commit to the TONE. Don't just mumble it.
    or
    scat an alternate way (just run some notes in the particular key and if it happens to change keys...GRAB whatever note you hear that might define that key change.
    This is "feel good" stuff , like blindly playing a lot of notes along with a
    solo. Of some value. But the former is better because it is more "structure".

    For those who want to write the music down. DO RE Mi..makes it easier.
    If the rest isn't worth the read, that's OK. If someone would like to
    explore the rest just reference it.
    _______________
    He wins, who plays the least

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by hubert54
    must it be Scott Henderson??
    Or Händel?
    nothing left behind "Johann Sebastian Bach"
    U understand?
    Its all music. Yes...All of it. Probably better to use music that is not
    pentatonic. Its to easy to duplicate. Use the entire musical palate if you
    like. Or any of your "jazz idols" on tunes you know and don't know.

    There is never enough time to practice. So practice what you don't know away from the instrument so when you return to practice, you have made some progress.

  13. #37
    Well, I am always curious to different approaches, so i will look into this Thom Mason book. But I really don't see how it is possible to hear anything unless you start with basic relative pitch ear-training. You have to hear those damned intervals the way you know the alphabet. Yes, THAT IS how you learn in kindergarten, you start with the alphabet and build up to words, sentences, etc...

    If you can't hear and identify a b5 interval, how the hell are you going to be able to transcribe anything or play something that you hear? I don't trust the shortcut methods very much. You need to do melodic dictation and learn to play simple tunes on THE INSTRUMENT. You sing the tune first (or hum it or whatever), but ultimately the goal is to play what you hear, not just sing it.

  14. #38
    http://www.iwasdoingallright.com/too...ner_songs.aspx

    This is the kind of approach I think is the most effective for me anyway. Link above.

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719
    Well, I am always curious to different approaches, so i will look into this Thom Mason book. But I really don't see how it is possible to hear anything unless you start with basic relative pitch ear-training. You have to hear those damned intervals the way you know the alphabet. Yes, THAT IS how you learn in kindergarten, you start with the alphabet and build up to words, sentences, etc...

    You learn 5 yrs before kindergarten. Living with those who speak the language around you. Think of it ...people can speak a language w/o
    reading or writing it. That makes them illiterate, but fully functional in
    a literate world. Wes couldn't read or write the music.

    If you can't hear and identify a b5 interval, how the hell are you going to be able to transcribe anything or play something that you hear?

    Break that into 2 part....if you can't hear. You can't do anything. But if
    you can hear the interval of the b5 in a phrase. When you sing the phrase and attempt to find it on the guitar,if you know what it looks like (the
    interval) on the guitar. Play with it. Multiple positions. Multiple string pairs.
    Also a good thing is to take that phrase to a different key and sing it and
    separate out the b5 interval. Really listen to it by playing the intervals on
    both sides of it....play the 4th, then the b5...play the 5th or 6th and then
    the b5. It puts it in a reference area of sound. Thom Mason's book or
    Jamey Abersold free brochure has you commit all the intervals to the opening interval of specific standards. So when you play the b5...then
    use those notes to sing the standard.

    2nd part...your correct. It is a lot harder to transcribe. Knowing your intervals, arps, etc. is only a "NECESSITY" when you WON'T SING and
    you don't have your instrument "at hand".

    I don't trust the shortcut methods very much. You need to do melodic dictation and learn to play simple tunes on THE INSTRUMENT. You sing the tune first (or hum it or whatever), but ultimately the goal is to play what you hear, not just sing it.
    Once again to be a complete musician your absolutely correct. But break this into DIFFERENT paths of learning, ALL necessary and DOABLE. Transcribing alone won't do it. Being able to hear every interval "out of context" or on an exam won't do it. Spend time transcribing...then looking
    and VISUALIZING the intervals on the instrument. Sound out each interval
    SEPARATELY. Sing the song standard that might employ that interval. Now your forcing you ear to change keys, because the tune usually will not be in the key area of the "transcribed phrase". That shifting back and forth really develops the ear in a more natural way. Its more fun also. Read all these posts of how totally "burned out" most get in trying top use the pedagogical method. The former procedure lends the music a real CONTEXT which makes learning go much faster and be more fun. Your playing games with yourself.

    SINGING constantly...duplicating everything you hear.Committing every note you sing by singing OUT. Is incredibly useful. It is what you do when
    you aren't doing music. Your VOICE is your first instrument. The guitar is
    way too complicated to do these easy tasks in the beginning.

    Solfeggio and Relative pitch is the next learning POD. But that's for some
    later time. If you see a need here, respond.

    Do pick up Thom's book at Amazon...it is cheap. He also moves into Moveable DO very quickly. He doesn't tie it to the guitar, because he is a SAX player but I can help you with that if you want. Thom is a Phd whose dissertation from Northwestern was in ear training. He's been at USC for years now.
    _____________
    he who wins plays the least

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719
    (Regular listening is a great way to learn......that's how I learned Polish. It doesn't seem that you are learning, but you are).

    This strikes me as another point in common between learning a language and learning jazz improv.
    I saw this thread and checked out a website for singing ALL SONGS that
    is really fine. Please, reply with the website URL because I can not find the
    site and I would like to use that one myself.

    Do what they....but see a diifferent context. Your learning Polish...your learning to play jazz...to feel its phrasing, rhythms and nuances. Just singing a tune from any starting note is very good procedural practice. But when you learned Polish...you never always spoke the same sentence/sentences.Its mixing and matching to emotional moment, mood, dissonance, consonance, etc. that you want to get. Language or Music. Wordsmith is right on.

    Take it from the learning concept...to the actual playing/while practicing is the intriguing part. Learning how to employ the intellectual concept and IMPORT it into a more JOYFUL LEARNING procedure is the goal.

    Howard Roberts said that the brain can only be totally attentive in 10-15
    minute increments. If your just using "brain power" it is overloaded in 15
    minutes and requires a DISTINCT BREAK. 2-3 minutes at least. With
    muscle memory you can go on go for hours. Reflex training doesn't have that limitation...hard edged interval and ear training does....ear fatigue is a
    total waste of time. Be aware of it.

    ___________
    He who wins plays the lest

  17. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719
    http://www.iwasdoingallright.com/too...ner_songs.aspx

    This is the kind of approach I think is the most effective for me anyway. Link above.

    I'm not sure who you were referring to above or which website. But the one I posted before is linked to here. It doesn't have all the songs in the world, of course, but it has a lot of tunes in the list and a lot of options.

  18. #42
    Something interesting is that what often happens to me is that I will start to play along with, say, Autumn Leaves backing track and, in my head, I will be hearing Keith Jarrett's solo from one of the Trio albums. Then I will stop playing because I can't play a solo like the Keith Jarrett solo. But that's the only thing that will come into my head: KEITH JARRETT's solo, not any ideas of my own.

    The brain is weird.

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719
    I've been working on identifying these 7th- chord inversions for about three weeks now. No progress. In fact, I think I'm getting worse at it.

    The central question of all questions: Is this whole ear thing (and therefore musicality in general) just innate and unlearnable and I must give it up or what?
    It can be learned. My experience with it has been that you will never notice yourself getting better because it takes a really long time. I've also found that computer programs do nothing to help you in situations where it matters. Only being in situations where it matters will help you with eartraining.

    The thing that helped me the most wasn't the classes or practica musica. It was singing songs while playing the chords on
    piano.

    I had a teacher say to me once "It's not that you don't know what notes to sing, you just don't know how to sing them." that really changed my perspective. I realized that if I wasn't confident in my ability to vocalize, I would never be able to accuratley sing the pitches. Since that lesson my ability to hear intervals as increased relative to my ability to sing in tune.
    Last edited by timscarey; 06-12-2009 at 07:39 PM.

  20. #44
    Now, I have to confess that I once tried to sing everything I played.It sounded just like Keith Jarrett!! Just the vocal part that is, not the playing. OUCH!! A little humor at my own expense.

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719
    Well, I am always curious to different approaches, so i will look into this Thom Mason book. But I really don't see how it is possible to hear anything unless you start with basic relative pitch ear-training. You have to hear those damned intervals the way you know the alphabet. Yes, THAT IS how you learn in kindergarten, you start with the alphabet and build up to words, sentences, etc...

    If you can't hear and identify a b5 interval, how the hell are you going to be able to transcribe anything or play something that you hear? I don't trust the shortcut methods very much. You need to do melodic dictation and learn to play simple tunes on THE INSTRUMENT. You sing the tune first (or hum it or whatever), but ultimately the goal is to play what you hear, not just sing it.
    Well... There are people, millions of people who can speak without having set a foot in a classroom.

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    Now, good ears are not innate. It's an entirely acquired skill. It comes from exposure to music, a lot of music, a lot of GOOD music... and an attention to details as well as the big picture.

  23. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Lambosoa
    Now, good ears are not innate. It's an entirely acquired skill. It comes from exposure to music, a lot of music, a lot of GOOD music... and an attention to details as well as the big picture.
    I don't think it's entirely acquired, otherwise there wouldn't be these extreme cases of people who, on the the one extreme, are tone-deaf or practically tone-deaf, and on the other extreme, people who are able to repeat 90 note sequences or memorize just about anything on first hearing. There has to be some innate differences. Maybe it has to to with memory actually. I don't know. Certainly a lot of it is also acquired though.

  24. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Lambosoa
    Well... There are people, millions of people who can speak without having set a foot in a classroom.
    Of course. I'm not sure what point I was making in that in that much earlier comment. But, yes, you don't really need to learn either a language or music formally before informally using them.

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by franco6719
    I don't think it's entirely acquired, otherwise there wouldn't be these extreme cases of people who, on the the one extreme, are tone-deaf or practically tone-deaf, and on the other extreme, people who are able to repeat 90 note sequences or memorize just about anything on first hearing. There has to be some innate differences. Maybe it has to to with memory actually. I don't know. Certainly a lot of it is also acquired though.
    The debate on innate/acquired is always tricky, of course. There's no scientific evidence for both sides, so I will agree that one ought to be very prudent in asserting anything about it (which, evidently I was not in my post ). My point is that I don't believe a "musical ear" has anything to do with genetics, but I might totally be wrong (though most modern geneticists suggest I'm right).
    However, there's also another tricky concept about "acquired": we tend to think that "acquiring" is resulting from a conscious, deliberate process, but that's not always the case, we acquire a lot of things without being aware of them, especially bad habits ! And I suspect that the tone-deaf are victims of that: they are not capable of turning their attention and awareness to the right things but I have trouble believing that they were born like that.

  26. #50
    No, it's absolutely correct and important to point out that "acquired" in the sense we are talking about is a mostly unconscious process, as in behavioristic psychology of removing "bad habits" (fear of snakes or something) and trying to replace them with the formation of "good habits". If leaning languages or ear training were just a conscious and deliberate process it would certainly be much quicker and easier than it is!

    But it's an important point that I'm glad you mentioned, since I often feel, in my own experience, that I'm making progress and NOT making progress at the same time. Patience and repetition, repetition, repetition of small tasks over a long time seem to do much more than, say, bashing oneself over the head because you couldn't figure out that whole Pat Metheny solo because it was too complex or something. You have to build up a sort of stockpile of sounds and musical memories over a long time.