Tonic or Dominant approach, beginners questions

[christianm77]

Man, Steve Rochinski, i studied with him at Berklee. This guy was a master of harmony, really passionate! Wrote most of the Berklee harmony books. Never talked to him about that specific stuff unfortunately..

Awesome, would love to track this book down. There's not many copies around, but not many books of this type either... Clearly a real bopper among other things... Devotee of Jimmy Raney etc...

[Babaluma]

Keep in mind, while Bernstein thinks this way (mixolydians) he is NOT just playing G mixoldian over a G7 chord...

I'm a big fan of this--I and V, tension and resolution. I started a thread some time back called "playing to targets" which had some great replies.

Sorry I can't find your thread. Please can you post a link.I found one called aiming for a target but someone else started it

[mr. beaumont]

Sorry I can't find your thread. Please can you post a link.I found one called aiming for a target but someone else started it

Let me see if I can find it.

[Babaluma]

Let me see if I can find it.

Much appreciated!

[mr. beaumont]

Took a minute but got it, I guess I called it "Going after targets" not "playing to targets."

Anyway, a lot of folks had some really good contributions, check it out.

Going after targets...

[Babaluma]

Took a minute but got it, I guess I called it "Going after targets" not "playing to targets."

Anyway, a lot of folks had some really good contributions, check it out.

Going after targets...

Excellent thanks for digging it up for me!!

[mr. beaumont]

Excellent thanks for digging it up for me!!

Thanks for reminding me of it...I went back and read, and dang--I've been after this for 3 good years and there's STILL a whole bunch of ideas in there I haven't checked out. Time to get practicing

[pauln]

I've been watching this thread and finally I started this post originally with, "What in the world are you guys promoting?", but after a cup of coffee I'm calm now... ...so I will try to be as nice as possible raising some thoughts here... my observations, and some leading questions.

This whole class of dual approaches (Tonic / Dominant, Type 1 / Type 2, Major / Dominant, Tonic / Diminished, Dominant-Dorian / Diminished, Subdominant / Dominant, etc.) really appears to be minimalist versions of some kind of chord scale theory, which I find surprising because the usual common wisdom around here is that CST as an applied strategy tends to be frowned upon, tending to perhaps produce "sounds of the cook book".

If CST, (which I don't care for and so am not defending) using all its theoretical machinery to relate complex chords and complex scales tends to sound lousy, for argument's sake, then how is it going to sound when the chord set and scale set are restricted to about two members each, fairly directly connected?

Taking this...
in C Major for example
Tonic ie I iii vi and the alternations - C Ionian lines
Dominant ie ii V iv vii and the alterations - G Mixolydian lines (or D Dorian, altering the root adds interesting colours)
...means the same seven notes available for all of the seven chords and their alterations. How do you express the harmonies of the altered chords without using the altered notes?

If "play Dorian with its tonic on the roots of the subdominants and tri-tone subs" means what it reads, I'm not hearing a jazz sound from that either. Dorian does not have the correct pitches.

"So anything with the 4th of the key in = subdominant" fails to convince my ear. The 13th chord on the bii as a tri-tone sub for the V has the 4th of the key (the major third of the 13th chord), but it does not sound subdominant, it sounds dominant (it is literally subbing for the dominant).

Am I wrong?

The good sounds are coming from beyond ionian and dorian, especially when the harmonies are altered... melodic minor, augmented, synthetic symmetric diminished, and my favorite - made up things that sound right.

Now, this thread, and a few others at the moment, are very much concerned with teaching. There is a thing in teaching where one first learns the incomplete or even "wrong" way of thinking about something until one is ready for the "right way". Maybe this is based on some incorrect assumption about what one can learn or perceive.

Ever notice that children's books and toys favor garish fully saturated colors, as if their new little eyes and minds were too undeveloped to perceive subtle hues and shades? The real world is almost entirely the subtle hues and shades.

Ever see how books about drawing want you to start by decomposing the subject figure into circles, ovals, and other primitive blobs, from which one is encouraged to add smaller same blobs until enough form is apparent that one can finally depict the figure? In the real world we perceive the figure as a whole, not as a composite of approximate blobs.

Has anyone ever taught the finished end result (like a Wes record) from the beginning? I think so, but maybe we are those who were self taught... the finished end was always the complete actual sound, with all its hues and shades, its whole figure, no unreal primary colors, no nonexistent blobs...

Thanks for listening.

[whiskey02]

I occasionally lurk at tgp (I do other things I'd be embarrassed to divulge) and think you might get something out of this lengthy thread.


The George Benson Method To Playing Changes. Get Ready To Improve | The Gear Page

[christianm77]

Hi all, I have been playing about in a primitive way with the Tonic or Dominant approach where the I, iii, vi diatonic chords are tonic and in C you play C major flavour lines and the ii, V, IV, viii are viewed as dominant so you play (in C) D Dorian or G Mixolydian flavour lines. Also you can look at all subdominants and tritone subs as dominants in this method. The dominants all share the 4th of the home key.

I have tried out some of this approach and find it very exciting. Of course it is just the bare bones of an approach and I am exploring it after self teaching myself lots of scales, knowing what notes are in each chord and arpeggios, I don't think it would have made such an impression without some hard work before hand. You can also look at various A minor forms over the tonic group of chords. Presumably the various alterations you can do with either the Major (tonic group) or the Dorian (dominant group) scales as you play will then colour the feel in interesting ways, for example if you start playing Dorian #4 over the ii,V,IV, VII dominant group chords in a progression. I think this seems quite a cool way to develop interesting lines while simplifying your approach and not having to learn loads of different scales with confusing names. You just think major or dorian and then alterations. I have been experimenting with jamming and then when I find a line I like going back and seeing what I did on a more technical level. Sometimes it works and sometimes it is a train wreck but fun to do!


However I need to dig more into the theory as there are things I don't really get. Specifically if we are playing a tonic minor progression in natural minor it works the same way. However what about when we bring in chords from Melodic Minor or Harmonic minor we are not really looking at the minor chord as being a ii chord of a major key. It feels like it's own thing. For example my tiny mind can't get how we would divide up the chords of C Harmonic Minor into the tonic /dominant grouping and then whether we are still going to use the dorian / major approach? I have tried some lines and they sound interesting but not sure if they are the same approach.

I thought the C-maj7 is obviously the tonic and also the III, VI. The G7b9 is the dominant along with ii, iv, vii?

In Melodic or Harmonic Minor chord choices or progressions does the tonic (major) and dominant (dorian) approach still work?

Cminmaj7

Dm7b5

Ebmaj7#5

Fmin7b5

G7b9

Abmaj7

Bdim7

Thanks!

Just realised I didn't actually answer your question (hey its JGO, what do you expect?) It's a little more complex...

So,as you say, the T/D thing in the natural minor works like the major scale with a different root:

Cmin7	Dm7b5	Ebmaj7	Fmin7	Gm7	Abmaj7	Bb7
T	D	T	D	T/D	D	D

So the other scale in common use in a minor key is the harmonic minor. Melodic minor is not so important for functional harmony. It's either an alteration to make melodies flow better (classical) or a colouristic sound to make individual chords sound richer or add more voice leading (jazz.) So anyway, harmonic minor:

Cminmaj7	Dm7b5	Ebmaj7#5	Fmin7	G7b9	Abmaj7	Bo7
T	D	T	D	D	D	D

Not much fundamental difference, but the difference is the Bb going to a B gives us a sound that probably works better on V7 then it does on IIm7b5. So there is a bit of a difference. Just the leading note really. You can hear that in lots of jazz lines. Try playing a C minor blues line on Dm7b5 for instance and resolve it to Cm by using the B note.

B is the most important note here. It's what gives the V7 sound its movement in minor.

So... in your terms, we would use dorian on IV (natural minor) or mix on bVII but then move to a dorian #4 on IV. That would give you the Bb --> B movement.

Now that second chord also where you would tend to use the altered scale.

Instead of using IV dorian #4 use IV locrian #2 is what it is called, but TBH I often just think bVI melodic minor. Easier, right? Still has the B, but also has the Bb as well, which is more useful than you might think.

[Alter]

Has anyone ever taught the finished end result (like a Wes record) from the beginning?

Wes is a huge user of all this! He plays chords over chords all the time, also substitutes chord progressions, alternate II-Vs, etc. Not scales so much, but chords, arpeggios, and whatever lines he likes to use.

[Babaluma]

I've been watching this thread and finally I started this post originally with, "What in the world are you guys promoting?", but after a cup of coffee I'm calm now... ...so I will try to be as nice as possible raising some thoughts here... my observations, and some leading questions.

This whole class of dual approaches (Tonic / Dominant, Type 1 / Type 2, Major / Dominant, Tonic / Diminished, Dominant-Dorian / Diminished, Subdominant / Dominant, etc.) really appears to be minimalist versions of some kind of chord scale theory, which I find surprising because the usual common wisdom around here is that CST as an applied strategy tends to be frowned upon, tending to perhaps produce "sounds of the cook book".

If CST, (which I don't care for and so am not defending) using all its theoretical machinery to relate complex chords and complex scales tends to sound lousy, for argument's sake, then how is it going to sound when the chord set and scale set are restricted to about two members each, fairly directly connected?

Taking this...
in C Major for example
Tonic ie I iii vi and the alternations - C Ionian lines
Dominant ie ii V iv vii and the alterations - G Mixolydian lines (or D Dorian, altering the root adds interesting colours)
...means the same seven notes available for all of the seven chords and their alterations. How do you express the harmonies of the altered chords without using the altered notes?

If "play Dorian with its tonic on the roots of the subdominants and tri-tone subs" means what it reads, I'm not hearing a jazz sound from that either. Dorian does not have the correct pitches.

"So anything with the 4th of the key in = subdominant" fails to convince my ear. The 13th chord on the bii as a tri-tone sub for the V has the 4th of the key (the major third of the 13th chord), but it does not sound subdominant, it sounds dominant (it is literally subbing for the dominant).

Am I wrong?

The good sounds are coming from beyond ionian and dorian, especially when the harmonies are altered... melodic minor, augmented, synthetic symmetric diminished, and my favorite - made up things that sound right.

Now, this thread, and a few others at the moment, are very much concerned with teaching. There is a thing in teaching where one first learns the incomplete or even "wrong" way of thinking about something until one is ready for the "right way". Maybe this is based on some incorrect assumption about what one can learn or perceive.

Ever notice that children's books and toys favor garish fully saturated colors, as if their new little eyes and minds were too undeveloped to perceive subtle hues and shades? The real world is almost entirely the subtle hues and shades.

Ever see how books about drawing want you to start by decomposing the subject figure into circles, ovals, and other primitive blobs, from which one is encouraged to add smaller same blobs until enough form is apparent that one can finally depict the figure? In the real world we perceive the figure as a whole, not as a composite of approximate blobs.

Has anyone ever taught the finished end result (like a Wes record) from the beginning? I think so, but maybe we are those who were self taught... the finished end was always the complete actual sound, with all its hues and shades, its whole figure, no unreal primary colors, no nonexistent blobs...

Thanks for listening.

There are some good thoughts here, I am a beginner really so there is a lot to learn and I don't see this as a short cut but as a good way for me to think melodically from a simple frame work. I will still use notes outside Dorian and Ionian when jamming. I have studied some CST and some other approaches and I find all of them interesting and useful in different circumstances. However I don't know very much hence putting this in beginners so good to hear all sides.

[Babaluma]

I occasionally lurk at tgp (I do other things I'd be embarrassed to divulge) and think you might get something out of this lengthy thread.


The George Benson Method To Playing Changes. Get Ready To Improve | The Gear Page

Wow this is a beast of a thread, pretty much what I was thinking about cheers!

[Babaluma]

Just realised I didn't actually answer your question (hey its JGO, what do you expect?) It's a little more complex...

So,as you say, the T/D thing in the natural minor works like the major scale with a different root:

Cmin7	Dm7b5	Ebmaj7	Fmin7	Gm7	Abmaj7	Bb7
T	D	T	D	T/D	D	D

So the other scale in common use in a minor key is the harmonic minor. Melodic minor is not so important for functional harmony. It's either an alteration to make melodies flow better (classical) or a colouristic sound to make individual chords sound richer or add more voice leading (jazz.) So anyway, harmonic minor:

Cminmaj7	Dm7b5	Ebmaj7#5	Fmin7	G7b9	Abmaj7	Bo7
T	D	T	D	D	D	D

Not much fundamental difference, but the difference is the Bb going to a B gives us a sound that probably works better on V7 then it does on IIm7b5. So there is a bit of a difference. Just the leading note really. You can hear that in lots of jazz lines. Try playing a C minor blues line on Dm7b5 for instance and resolve it to Cm by using the B note.

B is the most important note here. It's what gives the V7 sound its movement in minor.

So... in your terms, we would use dorian on IV (natural minor) or mix on bVII but then move to a dorian #4 on IV. That would give you the Bb --> B movement.

Now that second chord also where you would tend to use the altered scale.

Instead of using IV dorian #4 use IV locrian #2 is what it is called, but TBH I often just think bVI melodic minor. Easier, right? Still has the B, but also has the Bb as well, which is more useful than you might think.

I need to go through this in more detail when I get home but thanks very much for the answer

[Babaluma]

Just realised I didn't actually answer your question (hey its JGO, what do you expect?) It's a little more complex...

So,as you say, the T/D thing in the natural minor works like the major scale with a different root:

Cmin7	Dm7b5	Ebmaj7	Fmin7	Gm7	Abmaj7	Bb7
T	D	T	D	T/D	D	D

So the other scale in common use in a minor key is the harmonic minor. Melodic minor is not so important for functional harmony. It's either an alteration to make melodies flow better (classical) or a colouristic sound to make individual chords sound richer or add more voice leading (jazz.) So anyway, harmonic minor:

Cminmaj7	Dm7b5	Ebmaj7#5	Fmin7	G7b9	Abmaj7	Bo7
T	D	T	D	D	D	D

Not much fundamental difference, but the difference is the Bb going to a B gives us a sound that probably works better on V7 then it does on IIm7b5. So there is a bit of a difference. Just the leading note really. You can hear that in lots of jazz lines. Try playing a C minor blues line on Dm7b5 for instance and resolve it to Cm by using the B note.

B is the most important note here. It's what gives the V7 sound its movement in minor.

So... in your terms, we would use dorian on IV (natural minor) or mix on bVII but then move to a dorian #4 on IV. That would give you the Bb --> B movement.

Now that second chord also where you would tend to use the altered scale.

Instead of using IV dorian #4 use IV locrian #2 is what it is called, but TBH I often just think bVI melodic minor. Easier, right? Still has the B, but also has the Bb as well, which is more useful than you might think.

Sorry I am sure this is super clear but I am not quite getting it. Could you please right the scale next to the chord numeral for HM and then I can work backwards in your post because I almost get it but need to see it more visually. Sorry to be dim and thanks for the detailed answer!

[christianm77]

Sorry I am sure this is super clear but I am not quite getting it. Could you please right the scale next to the chord numeral for HM and then I can work backwards in your post because I almost get it but need to see it more visually. Sorry to be dim and thanks for the detailed answer!

Sorry I'm not quite sure what you mean?

[Babaluma]

Sorry I'm not quite sure what you mean?

Sorry my fault for being unclear. I am just not clear on which chords within the HM system you are referring to require the locrian and dorian #4 scales you mention as different from the natural minor? I think you are referring to the IV and the VII? Sorry very tired from work so probably just not being very preceptive as moist of your post made total sense!

[ragman1]

Babaluma -

Tell you what I think. I think when you try to simplify everything down to two chord-types, only dominant and tonic, it ends up being ten times as complicated as it was in the first place.

There's no short cut. I don't think any player in his right mind would think 'Now the dorian #4, now the dorian #2' and all that. It just doesn't work like that unless you're crazy.

Look at some transcriptions by anybody - Wes, Pass, Raney, even Parker - and half the time they're just arpeggiating or playing within the chord with passing notes.

Here's one. At 0.38 there are two 2-5-1s, Em7b5-A7-Dm and Gm7-C7-FM7. There's nothing fancy about either of them. He's using the ordinary notes with a couple of passing notes.

At 0.47 there are two minor 2-5-1s. Same thing, mostly chromatic runs between chord tones... etc. That's how real people play :-)

[ragman1]

Here's another one. The solo begins at 0.50. Check it out for yourself. At 2.02 at the bottom he uses the blues scale quite a lot.

[whiskey02]

What Ragman said, for me anyway. I get the concept, I actually came upon it myself before I knew it was actually a concept, but I feel you still need to deal with every chord’s individual tones, not just “a scale” that lacks “wrong” notes.

[christianm77]

Sorry my fault for being unclear. I am just not clear on which chords within the HM system you are referring to require the locrian and dorian #4 scales you mention as different from the natural minor? I think you are referring to the IV and the VII? Sorry very tired from work so probably just not being very preceptive as moist of your post made total sense!

No it was the IV both times.

TBH I just think of chord types... It's all about the leading tone, B, right?

So if I play in C harmonic minor I can play

F Ab C Eb = Fm7
But if I want to create a true dominant function, we need to use the B. There's these secret chords hiding out in the harmonic minor if you use the B that wouldn't come up if you just go through the scale like major... They are things like:

Abmaj7#9
Abmin6
Abmin(maj7)
Fm7b5

So...

F Ab B Eb = misspelled Fm7b5 (really Fm7#11) = Abm6
Which gives upper structure of G7b9b13

Now,
You can then relate that Abm6 chord to the Ab melodic minor, and you have the altered scale sound. It's all near at hand.

The Fm7b5 opens the door.

G Ab B C D Eb F = C harmonic minor from G
G Ab Bb B Db Eb F = G altered

So the main difference is the Bb and, particularly, the Db (b5) - that note gives you altered.
So now we have the E, right?

It's about being aware of the colour of particular notes... The Bb/A# you see a lot (#9) and can come from a lot of places (including the blues scale or mixing up the natural and harmonic minor. But the Db/b5 is a very strong colour, like a strong spice.

[Babaluma]

Babaluma -

Tell you what I think. I think when you try to simplify everything down to two chord-types, only dominant and tonic, it ends up being ten times as complicated as it was in the first place.

There's no short cut. I don't think any player in his right mind would think 'Now the dorian #4, now the dorian #2' and all that. It just doesn't work like that unless you're crazy.

Look at some transcriptions by anybody - Wes, Pass, Raney, even Parker - and half the time they're just arpeggiating or playing within the chord with passing notes.

Here's one. At 0.38 there are two 2-5-1s, Em7b5-A7-Dm and Gm7-C7-FM7. There's nothing fancy about either of them. He's using the ordinary notes with a couple of passing notes.

At 0.47 there are two minor 2-5-1s. Same thing, mostly chromatic runs between chord tones... etc. That's how real people play :-)

Thanks very much, this is all going on my practice sheet to study, very interesting! I agree there are no short cuts, I just like different approaches and then try and take elements of all of it

[Babaluma]

No it was the IV both times.

TBH I just think of chord types... It's all about the leading tone, B, right?

So if I play in C harmonic minor I can play

F Ab C Eb = Fm7
But if I want to create a true dominant function, we need to use the B. There's these secret chords hiding out in the harmonic minor if you use the B that wouldn't come up if you just go through the scale like major... They are things like:

Abmaj7#9
Abmin6
Abmin(maj7)
Fm7b5

So...

F Ab B Eb = misspelled Fm7b5 (really Fm7#11) = Abm6
Which gives upper structure of G7b9b13

Now,
You can then relate that Abm6 chord to the Ab melodic minor, and you have the altered scale sound. It's all near at hand.

The Fm7b5 opens the door.

G Ab B C D Eb F = C harmonic minor from G
G Ab Bb B Db Eb F = G altered

So the main difference is the Bb and, particularly, the Db (b5) - that note gives you altered.
So now we have the E, right?

It's about being aware of the colour of particular notes... The Bb/A# you see a lot (#9) and can come from a lot of places (including the blues scale or mixing up the natural and harmonic minor. But the Db/b5 is a very strong colour, like a strong spice.

Thanks very much for this detailed reply, this is very clear, starting to get it!