-
Originally Posted by Rob MacKillop
It's hard to connect them up properly at first, but after a while you start to sound like Wes playing a chord solo, it's great! Also I do them like 'arpeggios', e.g. just go across using the 6th chords only.
I must admit I always omit the 5th string when on the bottom 4 strings, it sounds less 'muddy' to me. Also I don't want to have to memorise those specific chords 2 different ways or fingerings.
-
01-11-2018 11:53 AM
-
Exactly as Graham said, I do the same things... Practice along first....
Drop 2's with the 5th string - you know when I started jazz guitar I was advised not to use this as it would be 'muddy' - now I think it's quite trendy? I hear a lot of modern NY style players using chords with 5ths and 4ths on the bottom string.
-
Originally Posted by sunnysideup
Actually I can share a nice story about this tune. Just after I did this video, I saw Howard Alden and Shane Hill at a local gig. Howard finished the gig with an amazing solo version of Stardust (you can see some of it on my youtube channel below, a friend filmed it). Afterwards I said to Howard that my version was a helluva lot simpler than his, just the melody really. He said 'Capturing the melody is the most important thing!'
So I was encouraged by that!
-
I think one of the advantages of the approach generally is you can apply the basic general principles and it will work well enough to get you out of trouble. Later on it can serve as the base of a solo style that is not so arranged or worked out in advance.
Being able to harmonise the melody of a song using maj6-dim drop2's is an important milestone IMO. Probably a good thing to aim for after simple scales in steps and thirds and 'chord arpeggios' are mastered. Then, you can work up a serviceable harmonisation of a tune without needing to work it out in advance.
-
Copying and posting from all my copious notes from all my BH sources (Barry, Pasquale. Alan, Roni)
Barry Harris cheat sheet
1. ii-6 = V9 (rootless)
2. bvi-6 = V7b9#5 (rootless)
3. IV6 = ii-7
4. V6 = iii-7
5. V6 = IM9 (rootless)
6. biii°----> ii-7 or iii-7
7. #IV° ----> I6/V
8. In fact, biii° = #IV°
9. In fact, the easiest way to remember how to use and name ° chords in any given key is-----
I°------> I6 or ii-7
IV°------> ii-7
V°-------> I6
10. I6 = vi-7
11. i-6 = vi-7b5
12. I6 = IVM9 (rootless )
13. i-6 = IV9 (rootless)
In a II-V-IM9, sub IV6-V7-V6
-
Originally Posted by grahambop
And I always hear Wes as being post-Parker anyway (Parker being the model for Barry H's method of course).
-
Barry Harris did not of course originate block chord/drop 2 harmonisation.
I'm sure that's obvious to most here, but I think it's good to be clear about that as there often seems to be a bit of confusion. While the basic exercises are basically 'block chord' harmonisations, that's just the starting point, a style already well established by the time Barry was doing gigs by George Shearing etc (Phil Moore it says on wikipedia FWIW).
The stuff unique to Barry is when we move away from that.
So in a sense by using the drop2's to harmonise melodies we are not really using BH harmony at all - this stuff is more widely known in jazz circles.
But we need to be able to do it, and get into the concept of the 8-note scales, to get into the more interesting stuff.
-
Originally Posted by sunnysideup
I think Wes would tweak some of the chords, (I do too!) so it's not 'pure' BH necessarily. But I think there's still passing dim chords going on, amounts to much the same thing.
Certainly Wes used dim chords a lot to move around on a dominant altered sound, I think any chord solo on a blues would have this (e.g. 'Fried Pies'?)
-
As Christian said, this stuff pre-dates Barry Harris. I think Barry says Chopin used it before he did!
-
By the way here's Howard Alden's version I talked about:
-
Originally Posted by grahambop
It's interesting that despite Wes's huge influence, no-one has ever done a thorough analysis of his harmonic method in the same way that Barry H has done of Parker's (and Powell's). But anyway I digress from the topic in hand.
-
Originally Posted by sunnysideup
-
:-) that's the one Graham, but was he talking about a principle (which is what I thought at the time I first saw it) or just a stray chord at the end of one song? Anyway, sorry to digress.
-
Originally Posted by sunnysideup
I'm not sure Barry's aim with this 8-note scale stuff is to analyse Parker's harmony - to my mind that side of things is more in the area of the Improvisation side of the workshop - line construction etc. Barry delineates harmony (voicings, harmonisations, comping, piano stuff) and improvisation (melodic improv, building lines, horn stuff.)
Improvisation is relevant to harmonic instruments such as piano and guitar, or even double bass, in so much that the frontline instruments (Parker etc) are the model for single note improv. Bud Powell is a clear example of this horn influenced approach historically.
I think Barry's harmony, while influenced by George Shearing et al, is kind of his own thing, unique not so much in it's sound, perhaps, but in it's application and development.
You don't AFAIK *really* find this stuff in Bud Powell either (as he stated himself IIRC), his major pianistic influence. Powell's left hand voicings are often pretty simple - 'shell voicings', although Bud's music does contain examples of the harmonised lines, contrary motion and so on that Barry also finds fascinating.
Not sure about Art Tatum - maybe someone else with more knowledge of Tatum could advise? (I find Tatum gives me a headache after 5 minutes, I'm not strong enough to take it lol.)
There is a lot of classical influence too ('the harmony is classical') from Chopin, and Bach.
From my own encounters with him in class, and what little I can tell, I think in Barry's own mind (AFAIK) he sees his approach as summing up past approaches, and uniting them under a general theoretical structure which can suggest further directions.
He certainly has a very specific aesthetic of harmony, and one that is sometimes sharply at odds with a lot of what is now customary in jazz harmony and theory. (Or really anything after the 50s...) But that doesn't mean that he or his students haven't developed the language in some way.
-
Originally Posted by sunnysideup
-
Originally Posted by grahambop
Which is ironic, cos everyone thinks that's how to do a bebop.
EDIT: as a side note, I'm getting a bit annoyed about Stella snobbery that's sprung up around the standard changes in some circles. There are many classic versions with the Em7b5 A7b9 changes that predate Miles' recordings. Jim Hall for instance.
Again, this has to do I think with digging a bit deeper into the standards which is something I wish I did more of TBH.... Peter Spitzer is good for that: Peter Spitzer Music Blog - he has a few interesting points to make that seem relevant to this side-thread. Also, original song changes are not necessarily the best for jazz. But it's good to know them.
-
I haven't met Barry, though I have attended a couple of 5 day workshops run by (very) long-term students of his. This is the only formal music instruction I've ever received, so obviously I'm coming from a very different place from you.
Barry's contribution is really fantastic, he codifies jazz from the early-mid bop era for posterity (as well as being a great player himself). This really is a major artistic contribution.
As you know he dismisses just about anything that's post-bop: Coltrane, Miles (after Miles stopped working for Parker), Bill Evans, Wes, etc for either being not true to the music or damaging it.
I admire his purist approach, but there was/is a lot of Jazz after Parker :-)
-
Originally Posted by sunnysideup
-
I think Joel Fass (?) said that Barry told him that he actually really like Bill Evans IIRC. There's a bit of an 'act' going on sometimes here perhaps.
In fact, I hear a lot of this stuff in Evans still. He does play a lot of drop 2 harmony, and some of his lines are very Bud derived. I think BH is really good for understanding about 50-60% of what BE plays (in the 50s)... But he's taking it a little further out of course with sounds that obviously aren't from that 40s/50s jazz piano world. And sometimes pushing it a little further....
BE seems more interested in harmony as colour. This reminds me of a criticism that Reg had about Barry's harmony. It's a matter of taste... Barry is blending colours, in my mind, like oils in an old master, modern players use more primary shades direct to the canvas.
And then there's the whole Ahmad Jamal strand, which represents another current of evolution in jazz piano...
Lots to listen to and investigate... I haven't even got to the 60s yet lol.
-
NSJ - thanks for your Cheat Sheet! I'll print it out, and sticky it inside Alan's book. It will mean more to me, I guess, as time passes. Much appreciated.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
But I'm not sure any of this talk is really helping with the original purpose of the thread - which was to play and develop playing ability - talk is cheap ;-)
Particularly as Graham seems to have distanced his thinking about his performance (the only one so far) from the Barry Harris method! If anyone would like to lead a BH thread from the front (ie with performances of standards based on BH) I'd love to join such a study group.
There have been a few attempts to start a serious BH thread over the last few years, but they have all failed so far.
Does anyone have the time and expertise (and I suspect a thick skin might be necessary too) to rise to the challenge of leading such a study group this time?
-
The Maj-6/major bebop scale superficial resemblance is unhelpful and confusing for students.
I think the term bebop scale is from David Baker? Barry hates the term, anyway.... He has the added note rules for scales which are analogous, but further reaching. The 6th-dim harmony stuff has nothing to do with that.
You kind of got to go with the Barry take on everything.... the terms etc... It's annoying in some ways, can make it less accessible, but he's been thinking about it for a long time, and it's all there for a reason.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Seem to recall a video clip of Harris complaining about how Bach and company separated major and minor in theory (but clearly not in practice), while they're "obviously" all part of one thing.
I love the old jazzer complaining about how classical theory greats "got it wrong". Ha! Ordering the DVD...
Beyond anything else, worth it just to hear him talk...
-
Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
Seem to recall a video clip of Harris complaining about how Bach and company separated major and minor in theory (but clearly not in practice), while they're "obviously" all part of one thing.
I love the old jazzer complaining about how classical theory greats "got it wrong". Ha! Ordering the DVD...
Beyond anything else, worth it just to hear him talk...
-
Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
People forget the greats just played and composed, someone else came by later and made up some theory to try and explain it.
Barry Harris / Oliver Nelson - Dom7/Diminished,...
Yesterday, 03:11 PM in Improvisation