The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 268
  1. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbler
    Interesting.

    Burton gets a gold star for making the playing of jazz appear as complicated and confusing as possible.

    A newb would be totally baffled and intimidated to even attempt to learn jazz by this video but experienced jazzers can benefit.

    I will get to work learning the 10-12 required scales so that I may instantaneously connect them to the chords passing by at intervals of every 1/2 second.


    Stan Getz is thrashed by Burton for playing by ear. Getz did not know the 10-12 required scales!
    Yeah. This is the takeaway of a lot of the YouTube comments as well. I didn't hear it as a put-down, more the opposite. Getz, like Burton early on, was hearing EVERYTHING "without labels". Burton describes learning the names as simply knowing what to call things he'd already learned from the music, like Getz and other great players.

    I don't think that the kind of listening (to what others are playing) that he's describing Getz doing is a crutch or something. More like what we all should be doing...

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    I think I’ve seen this video before, and it occurred to me that when he is effortlessly whizzing about on all those scales applied to a tune, maybe this is something that is easier to visualise and conceive (and play) on the vibes. The layout of the bars like a giant piano keyboard must facilitate this, certainly by comparison with the guitar.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    There is a very telling moment in that video. Gary Burton is talking about a situation where you see F#-7b5 chord but you don't know what scale to play over that chord type (starts around 12:58 or so). He says well there is F# you can play that and listen may be you'll hear some other notes others play (the context is, you do this in the moment to save the day but then go home and learn it properly).
    So this seems to indicate that in CST approach when you see an F#-7b5 chord you either can shred Locrian #9 scale because you worked on that chord or you have zero clue as to what notes might be in that chord other than the root? How about a b5 or a min 3rd or a min7?
    I know it looks like I'm making a strawman argument. But I think this is a true philosophical difference between the CST approach vs "master playing around the chord tones first" approach. In CST something like F#-7b5 is seen more as a label for a scale or a set of possible scales rather than 3 defining intervals (b3, b3, 3). It's associated with certain scale sounds.
    Obviously Gary Burton or other people who use this approach understand what chords are as well as people who don't use CST. But the mental approach is to associate chords with scale sounds, instead of explicitly think of the defining chord tones they are made of.
    I'm not disagreeing with people who like this approach. I do think it is an interesting way of looking at things. I realize that I even think that way some times. It's sort of there in parallel with everything else. Although I do think it's a more advanced way of looking at things. It comes with some experience as a generalization (or abstraction) of chord tone based thinking. Therefore I have doubts about it being a "getting started" topic.

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    How much music theory do I need before getting into jazz?-jazz-jpg

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    How much music theory do I need before getting into jazz?-jazz-pi-3pg-jpg

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    I think I’ve seen this video before, and it occurred to me that when he is effortlessly whizzing about on all those scales applied to a tune, maybe this is something that is easier to visualise and conceive (and play) on the vibes. The layout of the bars like a giant piano keyboard must facilitate this, certainly by comparison with the guitar.
    That's what I thought about Stefon Harris.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    I consider myself 'intermediate' (aren't we all in some sense?), not professional, so I'm not sure how you'd rate my opinion. I'd say spend 25-50% of your practice time on technique, scales, arpeggios, chords etc.. It's something you have to get down, and all the theory is in there once you have the sounds down. Spend the rest of your time having fun, learning tunes etc. I started learning tunes and transcribing some years back, without some strong fundamental technique and knowledge, and I wish I hadn't looking back.

  9. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    There is a very telling moment in that video. Gary Burton is talking about a situation where you see F#-7b5 chord but you don't know what scale to play over that chord type (starts around 12:58 or so). He says well there is F# you can play that and listen may be you'll hear some other notes others play (the context is, you do this in the moment to save the day but then go home and learn it properly).
    So this seems to indicate that in CST approach when you see an F#-7b5 chord you either can shred Locrian #9 scale because you worked on that chord or you have zero clue as to what notes might be in that chord other than the root? How about a b5 or a min 3rd or a min7?
    I know it looks like I'm making a strawman argument. But I think this is a true philosophical difference between the CST approach vs "master playing around the chord tones first" approach. In CST something like F#-7b5 is seen more as a label for a scale or a set of possible scales rather than 3 defining intervals (b3, b3, 3). It's associated with certain scale sounds.
    Obviously Gary Burton or other people who use this approach understand what chords are as well as people who don't use CST. But the mental approach is to associate chords with scale sounds, instead of explicitly think of the defining chord tones they are made of.
    I'm not disagreeing with people who like this approach. I do think it is an interesting way of looking at things. I realize that I even think that way some times. It's sort of there in parallel with everything else. Although I do think it's a more advanced way of looking at things. It comes with some experience as a generalization (or abstraction) of chord tone based thinking. Therefore I have doubts about it being a "getting started" topic.
    Yeah. I actually really liked that part.

    He actually keeps things much simpler than what you're describing though. His point throughout is basically that there aren't dozens and dozens of options for playing over that chord, (plain Locrian is probably his starting point I'd think. He never mentioned Locrian sharp 2) and regardless of how you go about it, you're going to arrive at that place. If you go home and practice "chord tones add the notes which sound good with them", you're going to end up with his more set anyway.

    You can try to reinvent the wheel or whatever, but the music has basic traditions.

    I never heard him say anything about NOT playing chord tones or not focusing on them, other than maybe mentioning that you also have to know what OTHER notes go with them. He did say a WHOLE LOT about working to get PAST the point of having to consciously think of pitch collections as quickly as possible. Everything he's talking about seems to me to be agreeing with basically BOTH sides of the "pure ear" versus "thinking in modes" "debate" that I always hear.

    I think we mostly think about all of these things the wrong way. Burton is an ear guy. Started that way and continues to talk about things basically that way while reconciling descriptions of things with the way I've heard players talk about things in describing pitch collections which others might describe as CST.

    Did anyone watch the entire video, like when he's talking to the horn player about some wrong notes etc? It's not an overly theoretical discussion. He's saying that you have to work out which notes sounds good one way or another, so that you can get PAST all of that and simply start making music.

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    Yeah. I actually really liked that part.

    He actually keeps things much simpler than what you're describing though. His point throughout is basically that there aren't dozens and dozens of options for playing over that chord, (plain Locrian is probably his starting point I'd think. He never mentioned Locrian sharp 2) and regardless of how you go about it, you're going to arrive at that place. If you go home and practice "chord tones add the notes which sound good with them", you're going to end up with his more set anyway.

    You can try to reinvent the wheel or whatever, but the music has basic traditions.

    I never heard him say anything about NOT playing chord tones or not focusing on them, other than maybe mentioning that you also have to know what OTHER notes go with them. He did say a WHOLE LOT about working to get PAST the point of having to consciously think of pitch collections as quickly as possible. Everything he's talking about seems to me to be agreeing with basically BOTH sides of the "pure ear" versus "thinking in modes" "debate" that I always hear.

    I think we mostly think about all of these things the wrong way. Burton is an ear guy. Started that way and continues to talk about things basically that way while reconciling descriptions of things with the way I've heard players talk about things in describing pitch collections which others might describe as CST.

    Did anyone watch the entire video, like when he's talking to the horn player about some wrong notes etc? It's not an overly theoretical discussion. He's saying that you have to work out which notes sounds good one way or another, so that you can get PAST all of that and simply start making music.
    I did latch on to his "ear playing" mentality (while using theory to answer the question "what did you play there?") and found this very interesting.

    So Burton played successfully and well by ear first and later learned all the theory and CST which allowed him to explain it?

    This is very interesting to me. The chicken or the egg. What came first?

    What Burton (and Getz) did was ear first, theory later (or not ever in the case Getz and scales?). Current jazz education is the opposite it appears to me. I've never been to Berkley so that is for others to comment about.

    I also found interesting his approach to ear training which was to play a corresponding scale (note collection) over a chord until it becomes recognized by the ear/brain. Example: Dorian played over iim chord. This sounds so obvious but most people don't practice this way, i.e. focusing on the way the scale and chord combination sounds.

    Per Burton, Getz played the same way (by ear), LISTENING to the other players, and harmonizing with them. How novel and radical!

    Getz actually listened to his fellow musicians while playing! Astounding.

    Unfortunately Getz never embraced CST and learned the names of the 10-12 magic scales. For shame, Mr. Getz!

    Stan was too busy getting high probably. Heroin is a bad drug.

    Did Burton become a jazz snob when he learned the note collections in the 10-12 required jazz scales?

    Now, what do we take away from this video?

    Well, use your ears is one thing. You can play good jazz without theory but you can't play good jazz without using your ears.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    Did anyone watch the entire video, like when he's talking to the horn player about some wrong notes etc? It's not an overly theoretical discussion. He's saying that you have to work out which notes sounds good one way or another, so that you can get PAST all of that and simply start making music.
    I'm watching it bit by bit. So far my favorite part is where he develops a simple 4 note theme through one chorus of Green Dolphin St. (around 24:12). He plays a very convincing solo by transposing the theme to all the chords of the tune while creatively altering the rhythm and shape of the same simple theme and embellishing it. Makes me want to pick a theme and a tune and practice for hours applying the theme to the tune, see what I can come up with.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    I'm watching it bit by bit. So far my favorite part is where he develops a simple 4 note theme through one chorus of Green Dolphin St. (around 24:12). He plays a very convincing solo by transposing the theme to all the chords of the tune while creatively altering the rhythm and shape of the same simple theme and embellishing it. Makes me want to pick a theme and a tune and practice for hours applying the theme to the tune, see what I can come up with.
    I have a Jerry Bergonzi DVD where he demonstrates ideas like that, it’s surprising how effective it can be.

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Teaching a starting jazz student CST is like a driving instructor explaining how the internal combustion engine works.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Teaching a starting jazz student CST is like a driving instructor explaining how the internal combustion engine works.
    Is this a poor idea because the mechanics of the internal combustion engine are too advanced an idea for beginners or because driving instructors are probably not the best resource to teach it in light of engineers being more qualified... or have I missed the point entirely?

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by SandChannel
    Is this a poor idea because the mechanics of the internal combustion engine are too advanced an idea for beginners or because driving instructors are probably not the best resource to teach it in light of engineers being more qualified... or have I missed the point entirely?
    Yes to both, although more precisely, it's simply not relevant, not too advanced.

    The second point I hadn't considered, but it's a good one. The performing musician is more concerned with real world applications than deep theory. 'You can do this', 'here's a situation' 'try this' not so much 'this is how harmony works.'

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    I have a Jerry Bergonzi DVD where he demonstrates ideas like that, it’s surprising how effective it can be.
    Yeah I have his melodic structures book where he uses 1235 patterns as theme. Is that what he does on the DVD?

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    Yeah I have his melodic structures book where he uses 1235 patterns as theme. Is that what he does on the DVD?
    It's a bit looser than that, he talks about using 'shapes' and 'sequences'. For example you just pick a pattern of notes going up and down, e.g. a pattern of 4 notes could be played 'up-up-down'. You can make the notes anything you like that works, there's no fixed rules. Then you play it all the way through the tune, varying the length of the notes, varying the rests, the rhythms, choosing different notes to suit the chords etc. The only rule is to maintain the shape i.e. 'up-up-down'. Later he adds approach notes and tags to the pattern, and so on. On the DVD Jerry plays the chords on the piano while his student plays the exercises on the sax. By the time he's through, it sounds like a proper solo.

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    Learning the major scale is very useful. The modes of the major then makes sense as they are just the major scale but from different starting positions. Understanding ii V I or 2 5 1 or whatever you want to call it is very useful. However don't put off just playing tunes and melodies. I spent far too long trying to understand jazz, and in fact I think it is much better to listen copy and play, then the theory can inform rather than drive the musical process.

  19. #43
    The real book came to the library today. Gonna get it at my lunchbreak.

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    "How much theory" is only half of the question. The other half is "how can you connect the theory". Like can you play your scale fluently and land on a desired chord. And vice versa. Do you know how the scale degrees sound against each chord you know. That sort of stuff..
    And the third half of the question is how can you use the theory when actually playing a tune.

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by emanresu
    "How much theory" is only half of the question. The other half is "how can you connect the theory".
    "How much theory" might be the half of the question. But it's not half of the practice time or experience. More like 1/10000000 of the practice time, rest is the other half. Theory is the least of ones problems. It's like the first one month of a life time of work.

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    try for autumn leaves

    5x555x for aminor7

    5x451x for D7

    and your G chord looks good.

    The A train tab is in C, I didn't check to see if it's accurate though.

  23. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by joe2758
    try for autumn leaves

    5x555x for aminor7

    5x451x for D7

    and your G chord looks good.

    The A train tab is in C, I didn't check to see if it's accurate though.
    How do you know the tab is in C if you did not check it. I think there is notes that is not in the key of c in the tabs. So the way I played the chords are wrong.. how are you supposed to know which way is the right way. If it just says d7 and there is alot of variations how do you know which one you should use?

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by AlexMalmis
    How do you know the tab is in C if you did not check it. I think there is notes that is not in the key of c in the tabs. So the way I played the chords are wrong.. how are you supposed to know which way is the right way. If it just says d7 and there is alot of variations how do you know which one you should use?
    because i know what the first few notes of the tune are, and they are correct. Also, the chord progression shows that it's in C.

    The chords weren't wrong so much as they're chords not used in playing jazz. There's thousands of ways to play each chord, and that's the good thing. That's where you can get creative.

    The chords I gave you are standard beginner jazz chords.

  25. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by joe2758
    because i know what the first few notes of the tune are, and they are correct. Also, the chord progression shows that it's in C.

    The chords weren't wrong so much as they're chords not used in playing jazz. There's thousands of ways to play each chord, and that's the good thing. That's where you can get creative.

    The chords I gave you are standard beginner jazz chords.
    It was fret 3 on g string so that is a# a# is not in c major right?
    Ohh okay the chords I was using I learnt from a begginer course not begginer jazz course so yeah...

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by AlexMalmis
    It was fret 3 on g string so that is a# a# is not in c major right?
    Ohh okay the chords I was using I learnt from a begginer course not begginer jazz course so yeah...
    that's right A# is not in c major, and before that there's a G# which is also not in C. A song that is entirely in one key would be called diatonic, and I can't even think of a jazz standard that is like that. The notes outside of a key, in the context of that key, are what add interest. You need a key to give the outside notes context.