-
I always found the "now practise them in all 12 keys" a complete showstopper. Most don't get past Page 1 of Mickey Baker...
-
03-04-2018 02:46 PM
-
Originally Posted by Kirk Garrett
Check out the "vanilla changes" to tunes. Google it online . Then, use Baker approach and methods to embellish . It's a good basic exercise. Then, practice doing similar with a "real book" type of approach: making things into 251's and 6251's etc.
Of course, at that point, you can then actually check against real book changes , and see what someone else did with it. Again, understand that real book changes are already basically embellished.
Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk
-
The rote aspect is the most unique thing you’ll find in the book. So many other sources don’t drill in the fact that, well, you need to drill it in. It’s the whole practice vs learning speech.
not selling anything, just made these to help
-
Ditto for me, and Rob Mackillop before me. I was going to go through the whole book have gotten through lesson 22, maybe will get back to it someday. I have videos of all those lessons on a thread.
Here's my thread: Mickey Baker Course 1, mp3's and videos
Here is: Lesson # 17, applying Mickey Baker chords to a jazz standard
-
Originally Posted by fep
This is my 1st post on this forum. I've been messing around with the Mickey Baker book off and on well over a year. I've tried to apply the concepts to some standards along the way (including "All of Me"), but the results never sounded very good. I just watched your "All of Me" video and suddenly the lights came on.
Seeing your transcription with the substitutions written below the original chords and then hearing you play it over the backing track clarified many things for me. I'm sure there are other examples out there, but this is the 1st time I've seen and heard somebody apply Baker's concepts to an actual standard.
I don't know if you've ever had the experience of trying to learn something that you were having trouble fully grasping. Then somebody says something or you read something and all the pieces of the puzzle suddenly fall into place. Well, that's what just happened to me with your post.
Thanks for posting this. I'll definitely be checking out your Mickey Baker thread. I hope you'll post more examples of standards like this.
-
Can anyone please explain MB's chord 9 or A13b9. It has no root note, and I'm struggling to understand the role of the notes. Thanks in advance.
-
A13 = A (R) C# (Major 3rd) E (5th) G (b7) F#(6)
when both the 6 and the 7 are present, it signifies a 13 chord.
The b9 note is Bb. You might expect that on top, but Baker puts it in the bass.
Baker's A13b9 is: Bb G C# F#
...only four notes. The notes that are missing are the Root and the 5th. Omitting the 5th is quite common, as it's the least interesting note in this chord. Omitting the Root is less common, but not uncommon in jazz, though it often causes confusion in students.
Baker strips it down to the interesting bits: 3, 6, b7, b9, or in the order of b9, b7, 3, 6.
OK?
-
Just a side thought for improvising over this chord...
The notes C# F# Bb (let's call that Bb an A#) form an F# Major triad: F# A# C#
So when you see that chord you could use an F# Major triad arpeggio to improvise over it with.
-
Originally Posted by Rob MacKillop
-
Jazz tunes/songs tend not to stay in the same key for very long. Just because the key signature is one sharp for G major, doesn't mean it is in that key all the way through, or even for one bar!
So, the presence of the C# but also the b7 note, G, indicates that we could momentarily be on the V chord in the key of D. That D might be a D Major chord (I don't have the Baker book in front of me) or it might be some kind of D7 chord, which would lead us to G.
Consider a ii/V/I in G. The chords are Am7 D7 GMaj7. Sometimes that Am7 is changed to some form of A7, for the purposes of leading us more strongly into the D chord. That's what is happening with Baker's A13b9 (I think, as I don't have the book in front of me). Sometimes we call these Secondary Dominants, in that it is not the MAIN dominant (D7 in the key of G).
So, if Am has become A7, there are a variety of A7 chords we could choose, such as A7b9, A7#9, A7b5, A7#5, A7b59, etc, and also A13b9. These are all variant colours which decorate the V chord, and some will have more or less dissonance to them than others. But whatever you choose, it will eventually lead to the D chord. But remember that that D chord was originally D7 (Am7 D7 GMaj7).
Does that help?
-
Thanks Rob, and for taking the time to explain. I press on in the hope that one day it will make sense
-
Originally Posted by w3stie
I think the most important thing with the Mickey Baker book is to really listen to these chords in context and not get too hung up on the theory. Having said that, I must admit to getting hung up on the theory all throughout this book trying to find explanations. So, I empathize with you. I've come to the conclusion that most of the progressions in this book are I vi ii V's in various disguises.
-
Thanks Jack, I've been thinking along the same lines as you. I figured if a guitar chord had no root, it could be almost anything, but its name perhaps would be decided by the chord progression, i.e. it's neighbours or by the bass player. I'm curious about the theory, but not hung up about it. I'm sure it will start to make more sense in time.
Last edited by w3stie; 07-11-2018 at 05:42 AM.
-
Originally Posted by w3stie
However, there is a serious lack of explanation. I'm guessing that that is the way things were taught back then. Just do what I tell you, get it under your fingers and in your ear, and then go out and apply it. Don't worry about why.
I'm going thru the MB book again from beginning to end. I never did the 2nd half. The standard notation scared me off, but I now know enough to struggle my way thru it.
On another note: I saw a video by Peter Rogine where he says that Mickey Baker just took the lessons from his teacher and compiled them into books. In other words, Mickey Baker didn't actually write the books. Don't know if this is true or not. In the end it really doesn't matter because it was Baker who made this material available to us. It probably would have stayed with his teacher if Baker didn't publish it.
-
Baker took lessons from Rector Bailey, a Brooklyn-based multi-instrumentalist. Here are some links if you're interested in knowing a little more about him.
Mickey Baker: A Tough Customer Who Never Lost His Edge - JazzTimes (Bailey is mentioned in paragraph 4)
THE JAZZ GUITARIST (with forays into related genres): Mickey Baker (Recollections from some of Bailey's students)
-
Like many others I got the Baker book in the 60s. I can't say that I've been through every page but it was a huge help and a good kick start. I picked up Vol. 2 not too many years ago where he takes things farther. I didn't put tons of time into it, too many of the chords required a reach that I don't have. Does anyone have any comments on Vol 2?
-
Originally Posted by mrcee
-
I really like the book, it has some nice "chord melodies." besides, it couldn't hurt to work on those stretches. Have you seen Jimmy Bruno play them? He appears to have really small hands, but can play Johnny Smith type chords. They are hard, but they sound GREAT
-
My hands are decent size but I lost the tip of my pinky so I'm out on the big stretches but I gave Vol. 2 a run for the money anyway playing partial chords and what I could. Anyone who's gotten anything out of Vol. 1 should give it a look. If I remember correctly it's a lot different that Vol. 1.
-
Originally Posted by Dad3353
I picked up books 1 and 2 in the late 60s or early 70s. The new blue book contains the contents of the black and yellow book 1. The blue book is a bit smaller.
My book 2 cover is different than the current offering.
-
Nice that they have combined both into one book.
-
I took out my copy of Volume 1 over the weekend. I'm doing the exercises that begin part 2 again. They really are useful. I know the guitar neck (fingerboard) better than I used to, and I'm committed to a five-position approach (-which doesn't mean I can't do other things; it means I know these five positions really well), which fits with these "runs".
-
I should probably go to Section 2, at 79 I'm never going to comp, just like single note flat pick stuff!
-
Originally Posted by goinbaroke
Frank Vignola has drummed one thing into my head above all others: learn songs and play songs. I think all of Mickey's lessons in part 1 assume that one is playing standard tunes. When you see something in a lesson, think, "Where can I put this in a tune I play?" When you can take it from a lesson book and put it in a tune you play, well, you can't help but feel good.
-
That's great info Mark, I hate to give up the MB section 1 but I'm more into playing songs note by note using tabs, only for my own amusement. I can do section 1 & 2 together as I have the time to do it!! I have leukemia and just play to keep my old punkin alive for awhile!! LOL
Red Rodney Interview
Today, 08:13 AM in The Players