Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Posts 51 to 100 of 130
  1. #51

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jameslovestal View Post
    Uh, not so sure about 'they both flopped': "they" being the song and The Song of Music musical the song came from: The original Broadway production, starring Mary Martin and Theodore Bikel, opened in 1959[1] and won five Tony Awards, including Best Musical, out of nine nominations. The first London production opened at the Palace Theatre in 1961. The show has enjoyed numerous productions and revivals since then. It was adapted as a 1965 film musical starring Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer, which won five Academy Awards. The Sound of Music was the last musical written by Rodgers and Hammerstein; Oscar Hammerstein died of stomach cancer nine months after the Broadway premiere.
    Sorry, my wording was a little vague, I was referring to the show and movie ATTYA was in, not the Sound of Music, which, of course, was a big hit. Hammerstein is still a giant with Broadway fans. One of his grandsons is a friend of mine, he's working on developing a museum at the farmhouse where he lived.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #52

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Not really. Most of the original versions of jazz standards were 'legit' - i.e. stiff and corny...Jazz is the art of making stiff and corny things hip. It's basically the job description.
    So true; My two main hobbies are jazz guitar and American studio-era films (films from 1929 - 1968). As you says most original versions of songs that are now jazz 'standards' were show tunes that were stiff and corny. Much of the stiffness was due to the lyrics and the fact that the music was structured to 'support' said lyrics. Playing these tunes in a instrumental version and adding that swing-feeling is what makes them jazz.

  4. #53

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JGinNJ View Post
    All the Things You Are was from a movie musical. Quite a few years ago I happened to see the scene it was in, it was a crooner number for the male lead. Very, very, stiff, corny, and schmaltzy. It's a wonder it was adopted as a jazz standard.
    But for jazz these changes that combine ii-v's sequences with 'key shifts' (which seem pretty basic and boring as a composition to me) can be challenging and interesting to navigate through in imvrovization I suppose...Like here)))

  5. #54

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by zdub View Post
    As a non-gigger I'm curious: does anyone care to hear these standards besides older folks? Is there much of a demand for such tunes?
    Curiously, my band was hired by a college fraternity to play a few weeks back. I didn't think that we had the repertoire. I was wrong. The young people were up at the stage mouthing the lyrics to all the standards. I was shocked.

  6. #55

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Greentone View Post
    Curiously, my band was hired by a college fraternity to play a few weeks back. I didn't think that we had the repertoire. I was wrong. The young people were up at the stage mouthing the lyrics to all the standards. I was shocked.
    .

    Interesting!

    I got into many standards by accident. There were two streams in my jazz development. One was an overnight jazz radio show while I worked the graveyard shift for 17 years. Some vocals but mainly instrumental jazz, with a blues hour thrown in at 4 AM. That was the 'main stem' of my jazz education. (That, and the reading and record buying it inspired.)

    The second stream was a college buddy who got divorced, later re-married and somewhere along the line became obsessed with Sinatra. I heard (and overheard) a lot of Frank's best from the '50s. And I thought, "these are some great tunes and the lyrics are clever."

    When I choose standards to play now, it's just tunes I like. I don't care how sophisticated or important or groundbreaking or old-fashioned they are. I just care whether I want to sing along when I hear them. That's why I'm not at all bored with "All of Me", or "Don't Get Around Much Anymore." And it's why I don't much care for "ATTYA" or "Autumn Leaves" ---I don't care to sing them or to hear them sung---but I know both and realize the value of learning them and knowing ways to play over those changes and feels. O, and I love fun novelty tunes, which are often played over rhythm changes (or similar "vamps").

    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  7. #56

    User Info Menu

    Well, it's notable how the pedagogy has shaped the jazz repertoire. Educators chose tunes with interesting changes, the OP is a typical list. Students could then take the already established practice of transplanting transcribed ii-V and ii-V-I licks into these tunes. Lots of players (including this one) have learned this way, but to my mind it's had a number of effects, most unintentional.

    1) estranging jazz repertoire further from the musical tastes of non jazz listeners, as most college grad jazz players don't actually know that much of the GASB other than not terribly popular tunes like Stella and ATTYA.
    2) focussing jazz education on a study of harmony
    3) downplaying the variation of melody as a valid improvisational technique, and the valuing of melody as both a resource and thing of beauty in its own right.
    4) not representing enough typical repertoire that a reasonably intelligent musician could start to abstract their own harmonic modules from the songs. OTOH the diversification of jazz harmony has made it harder to teach, especially as many musicians are kind of eager to play 'hipper tunes'
    5) confusing the nature of jazz raw material historically
    6) elevating the real book and lead sheets as a primary source
    7) Not teaching diminished harmony, as dim harmony is underrepresented in the examples presented.

  8. #57

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    ...3) downplaying the variation of melody as a valid improvisational technique, and the valuing of melody as both a resource and thing of beauty in its own right...
    Yes!
    "Thanks, but you should have heard what I was trying to play!" - T. Monk
    http://network.online.berklee.edu/profile/1200078

  9. #58

    User Info Menu

    I wonder how many of the Great American Song Book tunes were considered corny and were actually embarrassing to know by real music lovers at the time.
    At least until they were elevated by Jazz legends.
    May be I'm projecting from the 21st century musical landscape.
    But I mean, really, Fly me to the Moon. Come on.

  10. #59

    User Info Menu

    christian 77, "elevating the real book and lead sheets as a primary source" ... This is maybe the greatest shift over the last 40 years. Musicians/bands now know the lead sheets from the 5th edition of the Real Book, which has become the backbone somehow of the small group jazz industry--such as it is.

  11. #60

    User Info Menu

    Frank Zappa called,
    he says 'include Midnight Sun.'

  12. #61
    Apologies in advance for a threat hijack ...

    I keep thinking about my recent week in NYC. I heard Robert Glasper at the Blue Note, one show out of a 52 show residency. Tuesday night and the place was packed.

    Acoustic piano instrumentation, plus an electronic kb on the piano and a fourth player, playing laptop computer triggering sound effects and spoken word clips.

    80 or 90% funk/hiphop rhythms. Could barely tell when one song ended and another began. Couldn't tell what was rehearsed and what was not. He played a barely recognizable version of Stella and a few GASB quotes -- as if to prove he could do it. But, mostly, harmonies were simple vamps. I didn't focus on what scales/modes/whatnot he was employing in his solos. I did notice that I could feel something.

    This was a re-imagining of jazz trio (or quartet, I guess). It was great and the crowd was enthusiastic.

    Sometimes it feels like on-line forums focus on all the skills you need to be a top flight jazz musician around 1963 ...

  13. #62

    User Info Menu

    What do we mean by "know a tune" -- have the melody and changes memorized; or not getting lost reading it; or being able to transcribe on the spot in any key; or what?!

    There's sax player in my town who is 100 years old, and he gigs several times a week/month -- he's played with everyone who's anyone, and he's a gracious, cool cat! If you call out any of these tunes people are listing here, he'll just ask, "What key?" and then he'll play it, and he'll tear it up! If you call out anything post-1955, however, he won't know the head, but he'll still tear up the soloing!

    I saw Abercrombie a handful of years ago at a Chicago club; for an encore, he did "Four on Six," and he pulled out a chart for it! He then said, "Yep, you guitarists out there, I'm reading a Wes tune! Deal with it!"

  14. #63

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar View Post
    Apologies in advance for a threat hijack ...

    I keep thinking about my recent week in NYC. I heard Robert Glasper at the Blue Note, one show out of a 52 show residency. Tuesday night and the place was packed.

    Acoustic piano instrumentation, plus an electronic kb on the piano and a fourth player, playing laptop computer triggering sound effects and spoken word clips.

    80 or 90% funk/hiphop rhythms. Could barely tell when one song ended and another began. Couldn't tell what was rehearsed and what was not. He played a barely recognizable version of Stella and a few GASB quotes -- as if to prove he could do it. But, mostly, harmonies were simple vamps. I didn't focus on what scales/modes/whatnot he was employing in his solos. I did notice that I could feel something.

    This was a re-imagining of jazz trio (or quartet, I guess). It was great and the crowd was enthusiastic.

    Sometimes it feels like on-line forums focus on all the skills you need to be a top flight jazz musician around 1963 ...
    There is some truth to this.

    That said people playing that music all know this shit though. I mean they knew it back in the 70s when the funk bands were big....

    There are other contexts for music, but playing songs is an important one. This is why I say I downgraded my expectations. Kids don’t seem to learn any songs....


  15. #64

    User Info Menu

    Another way of looking it at is lessons or jams could be cultural exchange. Ok, o teach you a tune, you teach me a tune...

  16. #65

    User Info Menu

    Wow. Where are you teaching and can I take your overspill?

    Also, get off my lawn.

  17. #66

    User Info Menu

    I can't remember the name or the music from titles from tunes, a lot. Generally if someone can hum or sing part of the tune, sure i can play or perform it. Musicians who work all the time generally can play just about anything anytime. (I'm very average pro)

    I've worked with too many vocalist, so the intro starts, setting up a tune for a vocalist... you cue the vocalist and then...we go into a different tune... recent example. Set up Night and Day, typical last 8 and I think we were already in Eb, cued melody, fermata, we're holding Eb, then II V etc... vocalist goes into, I Love You, also now in Eb. No big deal, actually almost makes gig more fun. This use to happened back when I was kid also, part of knowing tunes I guess. (Maybe more of how to play and perform).

    Remember worked in a band back in 70's that had some great musicians, different local musicians and vocalist would sub in and out, depending who was around for gigs... one gig there were 3 musicians who all had perfect pitch, was interesting. Anyway same BS and vocalist goes into different tune... I remember the pianist was a badass, 7 degrees, played violin and bunch of other instrument, was from Europe, I think Brussels area in belgium, anyway knew most tunes but generally transposing beat him up... I remember having to call out changes to get him going. All this means nothing but there are different, "knowing the tunes".

    Typically when working, you cover for the rest of ensemble. We have each others backs.

  18. #67

    User Info Menu

    Well TBH it's not just the kids haha. Traditional music, I think, would never make the mistake of neglecting the value of orally learned repertoire. Jazz, too, is a folk music in this respect, but its time in the academy has given it the appearance of being a branch of analytic number theory. Anyway, despite my grumping, I love teaching music. Jazz is by far the hardest teaching I do, and part of the reason is our general remove from the repertoire....

  19. #68

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg View Post
    I can't remember the name or the music from titles from tunes, a lot. Generally if someone can hum or sing part of the tune, sure i can play or perform it. Musicians who work all the time generally can play just about anything anytime. (I'm very average pro)I've worked with too many vocalist, so the intro starts, setting up a tune for a vocalist... you cue the vocalist and then...we go into a different tune... recent example. Set up Night and Day, typical last 8 and I think we were already in Eb, cued melody, fermata, we're holding Eb, then II V etc... vocalist goes into, I Love You, also now in Eb. No big deal, actually almost makes gig more fun. This use to happened back when I was kid also, part of knowing tunes I guess. (Maybe more of how to play and perform).Remember worked in a band back in 70's that had some great musicians, different local musicians and vocalist would sub in and out, depending who was around for gigs... one gig there were 3 musicians who all had perfect pitch, was interesting. Anyway same BS and vocalist goes into different tune... I remember the pianist was a badass, 7 degrees, played violin and bunch of other instrument, was from Europe, I think Brussels area in belgium, anyway knew most tunes but generally transposing beat him up... I remember having to call out changes to get him going. All this means nothing but there are different, "knowing the tunes". Typically when working, you cover for the rest of ensemble. We have each others backs.
    Yeah I know what you mean. The melody tells you what to do in that music. The harmonic movements are quite stereotyped in general once you learn what they are likely to be (its easier to remember exceptions.) The bass line is also yours to play as long as you support the melody...If you learn a song from a chart, you always thinking 'root up' rather than 'melody down.'

  20. #69

    User Info Menu

    yea... maybe. Personally... the changes become less important when they are standard Chord patterns within common Forms.
    I guess it gets back to that... playing jazz tunes as compared to playing tunes in a jazz style thing.

    I believe the learning from charts, and the learning from bass line up or melody down, is just from not understanding the music. Not finishing the learning process. If your a vocalist or single line player, your generally going to learn from the melody down and vise versa. But with Jazz, the harmony is just as important as the melody... and obviously the rhythmic thing. I mean... who plays the melody or the changes the same, the same style etc... when playing tunes in jazz style.

    I guess not going through the process of learning tunes on the gig, or having to cover tunes you don't know on the gig... live, has changed what being a jazz player is. I mean most can fake a blues... at least a vanilla version. Why can't they fake other standard form tunes. The obvious 1st reason could be they don't know the Forms, so even if you can hear, changes, have good ears... anyway, who cares, it's what it is.

  21. #70

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by zdub View Post
    As a non-gigger I'm curious: does anyone care to hear these standards besides older folks? Is there much of a demand for such tunes?
    There is demand to hear these standardy standards in the clubs I play in Ottawa. People - even young people - like the tunes but musos tend not to. Not only that but the audience tends to like them played straight with the melody relatively unencumbered and stated with some sentiment. Of course, as we all probably know, playing these tunes as boppers might (at high tempo, extended solos and only glancing references to melody) often empties a non-musician room after 15 or 20 minutes.

  22. #71

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg View Post
    yea... maybe. Personally... the changes become less important when they are standard Chord patterns within common Forms.
    I guess it gets back to that... playing jazz tunes as compared to playing tunes in a jazz style thing.

    I believe the learning from charts, and the learning from bass line up or melody down, is just from not understanding the music. Not finishing the learning process. If your a vocalist or single line player, your generally going to learn from the melody down and vise versa. But with Jazz, the harmony is just as important as the melody... and obviously the rhythmic thing. I mean... who plays the melody or the changes the same, the same style etc... when playing tunes in jazz style.

    I guess not going through the process of learning tunes on the gig, or having to cover tunes you don't know on the gig... live, has changed what being a jazz player is. I mean most can fake a blues... at least a vanilla version. Why can't they fake other standard form tunes. The obvious 1st reason could be they don't know the Forms, so even if you can hear, changes, have good ears... anyway, who cares, it's what it is.
    Yes it’s this. I didn’t have to fake tunes until I started playing swing and dance gigs.... It’s not so bad when you get into it... What a III7 and a IVm sounds like...

  23. #72
    I'm not clear what not knowing the "forms" refers to.

    To me, the key issue is whether you can hear the tune in your mind and know what the changes are -- the same way you can hear when a blues goes to the IV chord.

    Or, if you don't even know the tune, can you listen to, say, the pianist, for one chorus, and know what the changes are? Same as if it was a 12 bar blues or Rhythm changes in Bb.

    That's a matter of having a good ear.

  24. #73

    User Info Menu

    Yeah there are a lot of forms that are repeated from standard to standard. I assume Reg means like Sears-Roebuck, Montgomery Ward bridges, rhythm or turnaround a sections, New Orleans 16 bar form, so on and so forth.Again it's gestalts. Good musicians aren't listening machines who go 'chord IV7' or whatever - they can do that, but, they will hear a phrase or a group of chords right away if its familiar.

  25. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Yeah there are a lot of forms that are repeated from standard to standard. I assume Reg means like Sears-Roebuck, Montgomery Ward bridges, rhythm or turnaround a sections, New Orleans 16 bar form, so on and so forth.Again it's gestalts. Good musicians aren't listening machines who go 'chord IV7' or whatever - they can do that, but, they will hear a phrase or a group of chords right away if its familiar.
    There are some basics that come pretty easily once you're familiar. It's easy to hear cadences like a rhythm bridge, a turnaround, I I7 IV ivm, going up a m3, a blues and so forth.

    But standards usually include something else -- and that's the challenge.

  26. #75

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar View Post
    There are some basics that come pretty easily once you're familiar. It's easy to hear cadences like a rhythm bridge, a turnaround, I I7 IV ivm, going up a m3, a blues and so forth.

    But standards usually include something else -- and that's the challenge.
    A lot of them - most of them - don’t really. There are a few genuinely unusual tunes. Stella is one. Hardly any tunes start on a dim chord. Also the form is quite sophisticated. But there’s not many of them when you start to look at the GASB in totality.

    That’s why it’s imperative to have played through a few hundred tunes. A lot of the patterns don’t seem like patterns until you’ve seen a lot of repertoire.

    Is that bVI7 chord in Out of Nowhere unusual? Is Just Friends weird for starting on chord IV? Is I remember You a bit funny for going I - VII7 - I? Depends how many tunes you’ve seen....

  27. #76

    User Info Menu

    Well imperative is the wrong word.... but it’s kind of the thing if you want to get good at standards. Swing music and trad helped as well because the changes are undecorated and easier to hear.

  28. #77

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=christianm77;984316]A lot of them - most of them - don’t really. There are a few genuinely unusual tunes. Stella is one. Hardly any tunes start on a dim chord. Also the form is quite sophisticated. But there’s not many of them when you start to look at the GASB in totality.

    That’s why it’s imperative to have played through a few hundred tunes. A lot of the patterns don’t seem like patterns until you’ve seen a lot of repertoire.

    Is that bVI7 chord in Out of Nowhere unusual? Is Just Friends weird for starting on chord IV? Is I remember You a bit funny for going I - VII7 - I? Depends how many tunes you’ve seen....[/QUOTE

    Nobody, except for obese accordionists with bad toupees and day gigs as bra salesmen (don't laugh, I knew one), played the I dim. chord on Stella.
    The songwriter was just copying the operetta style that show music came from. If a keyboard player played that change on a gig, I'd walk over to him, puke on his keyboard, and then tell him to go back to the Liberace workshop he's been running.
    The boppers made a tune that no one in their right mind would play, hipper and better to blow on with their subs on that tune.

  29. #78

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=sgcim;984330]
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    A lot of them - most of them - don’t really. There are a few genuinely unusual tunes. Stella is one. Hardly any tunes start on a dim chord. Also the form is quite sophisticated. But there’s not many of them when you start to look at the GASB in totality.

    That’s why it’s imperative to have played through a few hundred tunes. A lot of the patterns don’t seem like patterns until you’ve seen a lot of repertoire.

    Is that bVI7 chord in Out of Nowhere unusual? Is Just Friends weird for starting on chord IV? Is I remember You a bit funny for going I - VII7 - I? Depends how many tunes you’ve seen....[/QUOTE

    Nobody, except for obese accordionists with bad toupees and day gigs as bra salesmen (don't laugh, I knew one), played the I dim. chord on Stella.
    The songwriter was just copying the operetta style that show music came from. If a keyboard player played that change on a gig, I'd walk over to him, puke on his keyboard, and then tell him to go back to the Liberace workshop he's been running.
    The boppers made a tune that no one in their right mind would play, hipper and better to blow on with their subs on that tune.
    lol man I love this shix

  30. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    A lot of them - most of them - don’t really. There are a few genuinely unusual tunes. Stella is one. Hardly any tunes start on a dim chord. Also the form is quite sophisticated. But there’s not many of them when you start to look at the GASB in totality.

    That’s why it’s imperative to have played through a few hundred tunes. A lot of the patterns don’t seem like patterns until you’ve seen a lot of repertoire.

    Is that bVI7 chord in Out of Nowhere unusual? Is Just Friends weird for starting on chord IV? Is I remember You a bit funny for going I - VII7 - I? Depends how many tunes you’ve seen....
    Hmm. It doesn't seem that way to me. To check, I pulled up a list of the last bunch of standards I practiced with IrealPro (which turns out to have a history file). In order:

    Once I Loved. Several key changes and a unique transition to the bridge.
    Lady Be Good. Nothing unusual
    The Odd Couple. Bar 9 is not commonplace.
    Night and Day. I find this one easy to hear, but I can't think, offhand, of another tune with something like bars 9-12.
    How High The Moon. Not difficult to hear.
    How Insensitive. Not a common progression.

    If all this seems simple and completely easy to hear based on knowing a couple of hundred standards, that's great. Doesn't seem that way to me.

  31. #80

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=sgcim;984330]
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    A lot of them - most of them - don’t really. There are a few genuinely unusual tunes. Stella is one. Hardly any tunes start on a dim chord. Also the form is quite sophisticated. But there’s not many of them when you start to look at the GASB in totality.

    That’s why it’s imperative to have played through a few hundred tunes. A lot of the patterns don’t seem like patterns until you’ve seen a lot of repertoire.

    Is that bVI7 chord in Out of Nowhere unusual? Is Just Friends weird for starting on chord IV? Is I remember You a bit funny for going I - VII7 - I? Depends how many tunes you’ve seen....[/QUOTE

    Nobody, except for obese accordionists with bad toupees and day gigs as bra salesmen (don't laugh, I knew one), played the I dim. chord on Stella.
    The songwriter was just copying the operetta style that show music came from. If a keyboard player played that change on a gig, I'd walk over to him, puke on his keyboard, and then tell him to go back to the Liberace workshop he's been running.
    The boppers made a tune that no one in their right mind would play, hipper and better to blow on with their subs on that tune.
    i would kiss the accordionist (post facto) that played the diminished instead of the minor II V (plus ensuing deceptive cadences) and I expect you (Christian) would too. I think (sorry guys) many jazz guitarists have never studied really basic harmony (e.g. Paul Hindemith) and they see a lot of what they are studying as rather difficult or somehow on the edge but really it is not. Once you grasp tri-tone substitutions, V of Vs, and diminished substitutions for dominant chords you are a long way there. A lot of this is contained in Hindemith and even Eddie Lang's method book written in the 20s. So much of jazz is dressing up basic traditional harmony. I love jazz for that but my god the convoluted discussions could be avoided if people just took 2 or 3 months and worked through some basic classical harmony texts. If you listen to early 20th century classical - even late 19th century stuff - there is nothing new in Parker, Miles, Bill Evans etc. The styles are different but the basic knowledge is the same. Start from the basics and the tried and true and move from there.

  32. #81

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=Roberoo;984359]
    Quote Originally Posted by sgcim View Post

    i would kiss the accordionist (post facto) that played the diminished instead of the minor II V (plus ensuing deceptive cadences) and I expect you (Christian) would too. I think (sorry guys) many jazz guitarists have never studied really basic harmony (e.g. Paul Hindemith) and they see a lot of what they are studying as rather difficult or somehow on the edge but really it is not. Once you grasp tri-tone substitutions, V of Vs, and diminished substitutions for dominant chords you are a long way there. A lot of this is contained in Hindemith and even Eddie Lang's method book written in the 20s. So much of jazz is dressing up basic traditional harmony. I love jazz for that but my god the convoluted discussions could be avoided if people just took 2 or 3 months and worked through some basic classical harmony texts. If you listen to early 20th century classical - even late 19th century stuff - there is nothing new in Parker, Miles, Bill Evans etc. The styles are different but the basic knowledge is the same. Start from the basics and the tried and true and move from there.
    I have come to the conclusion that a gentleman knows the first chord is a dim7, but chooses not to be a dick about it on the bandstand :-) besides almost everyone plays ii v on records.

    Stella is an interesting one because it’s chock full of long diatonic appoggiaturas. These get written as extensions in jazz charts. Except for the ‘11ths’ on the major chords for some reason lol.

    To me jazz harmony is actually based on a misunderstanding or rereading of Western harmony. Partly it’s because jazz has always been a music of layers, harmonic, rhythmic and melodic.

    I don’t know Hindemiths harmony book. Worth a read?

  33. #82

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar View Post
    Hmm. It doesn't seem that way to me. To check, I pulled up a list of the last bunch of standards I practiced with IrealPro (which turns out to have a history file). In order:

    Once I Loved. Several key changes and a unique transition to the bridge.
    Lady Be Good. Nothing unusual
    The Odd Couple. Bar 9 is not commonplace.
    Night and Day. I find this one easy to hear, but I can't think, offhand, of another tune with something like bars 9-12.
    How High The Moon. Not difficult to hear.
    How Insensitive. Not a common progression.

    If all this seems simple and completely easy to hear based on knowing a couple of hundred standards, that's great. Doesn't seem that way to me.
    Bridges are often where it gets interesting.

    The night and Day long turnaround

    F#m7b5 Fm6 Em7 Ebo7 etc

    Actually turns up in quite a few tunes. Some of them, but not all by Cole Porter. Some jazz compositions as well. Djangology is a good example. Something similar in A Smooth One (Charlie c.) also a very useful sub - bearing in mind F#m7b5 is often used as a sub for C particularly in the second half of an ABAC form of the third repeat of an A (think they can’t take that away, I thought about you, misty etc) depending on the melody you might not want to use Green Dolphin Street last 4 style backcycling motion.

    Non cadential turnaround movement like this is much more common in previous jazz. But bud Powell was a fan of this prog, used it for endings too.

    How insensitive has a couple of unusual motions in it, specifically G7/B Bbmaj7. Also the move F7/C E7/B Bbmaj7. So the inverted dominant revolving as if it’s built on the bass note. Everything else is pretty standard....

    It might seem a little convenient but I don’t really count Jobim tunes as standards in the GASB sense. However knowing your pre war harmony helps a lot with Jobim.

    Lastly re: other tunes you have to listen to a versions of them, and check out the legit original version and where they are coming from. Very often something that looks weird is some sort of jazz reharm of something much more commonplace usually some sort of common tone diminished chord or an aug 6. Sometimes the melody is altered slightly for the reharm. This is true of Darn That Dream for instance.

  34. #83

    User Info Menu

    Btw Darn has

    Em Em/D C#7b5 Cm6 Bm7b5 E7b9 Am

    In G

    Hopefully you can see how that relates to the N&D prog

    Also Jobim has

    F#m7b5 Fm9 C etc in Aguas de Marco

    Jazz harmony is actually stamp collecting, but people think it’s physics.

  35. #84

    User Info Menu

    The issue of jazz as repertoire vs jazz as technique is constantly on my mind. But rather than hijack the thread too far, I would ask: Is there anyone who has successfully applied bebop technique and sensibility to popular tunes from the later part of the 20th and early 21st centuries? Are there serious jazz treatments of "Let it Go", "Circle of Life", "Under the Sea", etc? If not show tunes, Beatles tunes? James Taylor? Police? Eagles? Tom Petty? Nirvana? Britney Spears? Sinnead O'Connor? Coldplay? Byoncee? Whatever the f&*^ kids listen to now?

    I don't mean novelty arrangements for quick chuckles. I mean arrangements made with the same kind of intensity and seriousness as the original bebop artist did in the 40's.

    Does that exist?

  36. #85

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rlrhett View Post
    The issue of jazz as repertoire vs jazz as technique is constantly on my mind. But rather than hijack the thread too far, I would ask: Is there anyone who has successfully applied bebop technique and sensibility to popular tunes from the later part of the 20th and early 21st centuries? Are there serious jazz treatments of "Let it Go", "Circle of Life", "Under the Sea", etc? If not show tunes, Beatles tunes? James Taylor? Police? Eagles? Tom Petty? Nirvana? Britney Spears? Sinnead O'Connor? Coldplay? Byoncee? Whatever the f&*^ kids listen to now?I don't mean novelty arrangements for quick chuckles. I mean arrangements made with the same kind of intensity and seriousness as the original bebop artist did in the 40's. Does that exist?
    It's funny that people keep asking the question on a jazz forum, as if there aren't bands and artists who are famous for doing specifically this. Do they not listen to present day jazz? Do they not, for that matter, look at the thread (Nirvana tune above.) It's not even something restricted to obscure artists. Here is one of my favourite examples. It's not bebop, but then bebop is not really the way people play now.

  37. #86

    User Info Menu

    I don't think anything Cassandra Wilson has done is for quick chuckles either

  38. #87

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Bridges are often where it gets interesting.
    in concern of trad song form (which is often called AABA (and which I call just AB - after all there are only 2 full cadences in the basic form) I think there are two types:1) - the chorus is more individually elaborated harmony but at teh same time more stable harmonically and easier to memorize it - the bridge is not stable, modulating, more cliches - basically its function to take a step a side, to bring in some contrast, in taht case the bridge brings in some instability, some hezitation, in some sense it opens a possibility of something else 2) - the chorus is unstable, making tension, dense chromatic moves etc. - the bridge on the contraty using traditional and spacious harmony but again often a cliche of it... it functions as a contrast to the chorus again. But this time it works as a realese... Like Darn that Dream or Sophisticated Lady

  39. #88

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=christianm77;984397]
    Quote Originally Posted by Roberoo View Post
    To me jazz harmony is actually based on a misunderstanding or rereading of Western harmony. Partly it’s because jazz has always been a music of layers, harmonic, rhythmic and melodic.
    Good classical musicians I know - when you show them 'jazz harmony' and say - this is that chord and this is that... they usually say: ok but it is just a triad with unresoved suspension (or anticipation) etc.It does not work in every context of course but it is often true.But I think the important point about it is that it became essential in jazz. At some turning point these 'suspensions' and 'anticipation' lost there classical functionality to some degree and became and integral part of vertical harmony and then another langauge began to form

  40. #89

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    It's funny that people keep asking the question on a jazz forum, as if there aren't bands and artists who are famous for doing specifically this. Do they not listen to present day jazz? Do they not, for that matter, look at the thread (Nirvana tune above.) It's not even something restricted to obscure artists. Here is one of my favourite examples. It's not bebop, but then bebop is not really the way people play now.
    I’s funny that people are so steeped in their own experiences, their own interest, or their own mind that they can’t conceive that other people may not share their ideas and can’t help but sound pedantic and patronizing answering a question.

    “Famous”? Almost by definition if no one on a jazz focused forum knows what you are talking about, that it isn’t “fame”.

    As for “they”, I can’t speak for others. I leave that to you. But to me that “Nirvana” recording is obscure, even if it doesn’t seem so to you. I listen to jazz daily, but also classical music, bluegrass, even the occasional pop tune. What I hear tend to be “standards” or original compositions that don’t build on well known tunes or melodies.

    That said, I accept I don’t know the secret handshake to be in your club. If combing through “present day jazz” means seeking out obscure music not played on radio, Spotify, pandora, or the like, then yes. “They” don’t listen to present day jazz.

    Oh, and if no one plays bebop anymore, then your answer to my question was simple: no. No one has taken hits from the second half the twentieth century and seriously applied a bebop technique and sensibilities. Pedant lecture unnecessary. I personally think the statement that “bebop is not really the way people play now” patently absurd. The most followed thread on this forum is about Barry Harris and how to play “like that”. But I’m not even in the cool kids jazz club, so I don’t know.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  41. #90

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I don't think anything Cassandra Wilson has done is for quick chuckles either
    I like it. Paradoxally this is probably how Joni would have done maybe 7-10 years later after the issue of original)))But still I like the original changes better... Joni has fantastic feel of harmony and melody... there is a late version of it with Joni and orchestra - I like how they arranged all 'those open chords' in orchestral style.

  42. #91

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rlrhett View Post
    The issue of jazz as repertoire vs jazz as technique is constantly on my mind. But rather than hijack the thread too far, I would ask: Is there anyone who has successfully applied bebop technique and sensibility to popular tunes from the later part of the 20th and early 21st centuries? Are there serious jazz treatments of "Let it Go", "Circle of Life", "Under the Sea", etc? If not show tunes, Beatles tunes? James Taylor? Police? Eagles? Tom Petty? Nirvana? Britney Spears? Sinnead O'Connor? Coldplay? Byoncee? Whatever the f&*^ kids listen to now?

    I don't mean novelty arrangements for quick chuckles. I mean arrangements made with the same kind of intensity and seriousness as the original bebop artist did in the 40's.

    Does that exist?
    There is the Joe Pass Rolling Stones album, if that qualifies.


  43. #92

    User Info Menu

    Dave Stryker has made some albums of 70s pop tunes in a jazz style.


  44. #93

    User Info Menu

    Jim Mullen also does this kind of thing quite often, here it's a Steely Dan tune.


  45. #94

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar View Post
    I'm not clear what not knowing the "forms" refers to.

    To me, the key issue is whether you can hear the tune in your mind and know what the changes are -- the same way you can hear when a blues goes to the IV chord.

    Or, if you don't even know the tune, can you listen to, say, the pianist, for one chorus, and know what the changes are? Same as if it was a 12 bar blues or Rhythm changes in Bb.

    That's a matter of having a good ear.
    Hey rp... Forms are the constructive and organizing elements in music. Forms are what create balance and symmetry in tunes and improvisation. The presentation, development and interrelationship of ideas. Not just the basic structure,(AABA), but also the techniques and procedures used to develop ideas within that basic structure. (there is a lot more)

    Yea most amateur musicians don't get past the basic forms, or just working from a melody, embellishment approach etc. Having a good ear is obviously required to play, But for most that is just a technical skill that is developed from years of playing.(sometimes)

    Understanding how to develop a good ear and how to develop music takes more than just years of playing. But who cares.

    Roberoo... YEA...getting some basic musicianship and understanding Functional Harmony... obviously helps. Maybe more like 6 months and some heavy hours.... but it's all out there. And then maybe move past borrowing to modal concepts or expansion of basic tonality guidelines, which leads to 7th chords actually have organization, beyond triads. But that can just be common practice from Subs. usage.

    rirhett... yes, check out Monty Alexander, Eliane Elias, Mike Ledonne, Joe Lock... just off the top of my head. I love to play pop tune for the masses and then work into jazz... obviously depending on audience.

    As Christian was saying.. Jazz is just stamp collecting... well yea, there is only so much to work with, but how we use that BS is part of playing in a jazz style. Can be as simple as.... How and where you pull from for subs to create improv or develop the changes while comping. The playing with the form and rhythm of the basic tune to help create tension or just create a more layered references for improv.

    Personally, it's a lot more entertaining to perform with musicians who have bebop technique... than be stuck in slow motion non sub-divide grooves... if they even happen at all. It's also fun to wake up a dinner house.

    Famous jazz players... come on. that's almost an oxymoron.

    So is it more embarrassing to not know the tune... or know it and sound like shit, or is that the same thing.

  46. #95

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg View Post

    rirhett... yes, check out Monty Alexander,
    I like Monty Alexander a lot. Here he is doing a Bob Marley tune, No Woman, No Cry.



    And here is Monty with Ray Brown and Herb Ellis doing a jazz standard, When Lights Are Low.

    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  47. #96

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rlrhett View Post
    I’s funny that people are so steeped in their own experiences, their own interest, or their own mind that they can’t conceive that other people may not share their ideas and can’t help but sound pedantic and patronizing answering a question.

    “Famous”? Almost by definition if no one on a jazz focused forum knows what you are talking about, that it isn’t “fame”.

    As for “they”, I can’t speak for others. I leave that to you. But to me that “Nirvana” recording is obscure, even if it doesn’t seem so to you. I listen to jazz daily, but also classical music, bluegrass, even the occasional pop tune. What I hear tend to be “standards” or original compositions that don’t build on well known tunes or melodies.

    That said, I accept I don’t know the secret handshake to be in your club. If combing through “present day jazz” means seeking out obscure music not played on radio, Spotify, pandora, or the like, then yes. “They” don’t listen to present day jazz.

    Oh, and if no one plays bebop anymore, then your answer to my question was simple: no. No one has taken hits from the second half the twentieth century and seriously applied a bebop technique and sensibilities. Pedant lecture unnecessary. I personally think the statement that “bebop is not really the way people play now” patently absurd. The most followed thread on this forum is about Barry Harris and how to play “like that”. But I’m not even in the cool kids jazz club, so I don’t know.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    Yeah, my attitude might have been grumpy, but this is a thing that comes up a lot and people always seem to think they have made some significant observation by saying jazz musicians don't play modern pop songs. Well I don't actually think it's pedantic to say it's obviously untrue for anyone with even a cursory interest in what jazz musicians are doing now. You only have to know who Brad Mehldau is for instance.

    Even Barry Harris plays Isn't She Lovely. And he plays bop on it.

    So, no it's not like you need to be a total contemporary modern jazz buff. I'm not, there's loads of stuff I haven't checked out. It's more that - wow, playing pop songs from the post GASB era isn't even a massive deal for straightahead players.

    If you think Robert Glasper is obscure, well, he isn't. He's worked with many of the big names in modern day hip hop and neo soul. He was a major feature on Kendrick Lamarr's To Pimp a Butterfly, one of the most highly critically rated albums of the past ten years, and also a massive chart success. Now that's not Ariana Grande, but it's not obscure. Certainly for a jazz musician.

    So no, you don't have to be in the funny handshake club, you just have a vague interest in what's been going on in modern music. And no one's saying you have to be interested in modern music. And if you want to grumpy about it, sure, that can be a lot of fun. And one can spend a lifetime listening to Blue Note reissues.

    Look, I know I'm being a dick here. But, my assholish is directed not at you specifically. This is something people say seemingly all the time on groups like this, and it's just boring the bejeesus out of me. Stop blaming imaginary musicians for something that isn't the case!
    Last edited by christianm77; 10-21-2019 at 05:15 PM.

  48. #97

    User Info Menu

    A more interesting question to ask, which may have been the one you intended is -

    Is there something about the harmony of mid 20th century popular song that uniquely facilitates bebop language?

    Maybe...

  49. #98

    User Info Menu

    Glasper's gorgeous reharm of Black Hole Sun (music at 3:35) warms this X-ellenial jazz heart tho.


  50. #99
    I still don't understand Reg and others' use of the term "form".

    I get the feeling that they may be seeing something in the tunes that I'm not seeing, but I can't figure out what it is.

    I know standards the same way I know Home on the Range. That is, for the tunes I know, I can hear the melody and harmony in my mind and my fingers find the chords.

    The only part of this that seems like it might be dependent on something called "form" is being able to hear cadences of chords instead of hearing them individually. Is that what Reg and others are talking about?

  51. #100

    User Info Menu

    I think it’s to do with hearing the common progressions that crop up over and over again in many Standards. E.g. 1-6-2-5, or the change from major to relative minor (e.g. first few bars of Confirmation, or There will never be another you (same progression)), or the ‘backdoor’ progression, or the movement from I to IV via a ii-V (e.g. going into the bridge of Lady Be Good).

    If you can recognise these then you don’t need to rely so much on remembering individual chords.

    Bruce Forman calls these the ‘cycles’ and says he only needs to remember the melody of a tune, just knowing that is enough for him to know what the associated ‘cycles’ are within that tune. So he knows hundreds of tunes without having to memorise the chord changes.