What is your primary reference for practicing improvisation?

[rpjazzguitar]

Horn players do play the chords.
Attachment 118300

On the face of it, it looks like he's thinking tonal center, chromatics and some passing tones. Or, at least, you could get to this thinking that way.

And, he's aware of the chord tones although he doesn't seem to feel the need to play the chord tones on downbeats all the time.

As far as figuring out the chord changes from the solo -- generally speaking you're more likely to be able to do that with a very vanilla solo. In a lot of more sophisticated solos, the soloist outlines arp X over chord Y. So, if you just hear the solo, without the rest of the band, you'll think X, not Y.

[pauln]

It's funny, I don't use chord lingo when thinking about them, so I often look things up to verify their definitions in order to follow along in the forum. I just searched for "chord tone" and the first result was "chord factor"!
I'd never heard of it before... notice it includes the 6th, based on consonance...

"In music, a factor or chord factor is a member or component of a chord. These are named root, third, fifth, sixth, seventh, ninth (compound 2nd), eleventh (compound 4th), thirteenth (compound 6th), and so on, for their generic interval above the root.[1] In harmony, the consonance and dissonance of a chord factor and a nonchord tone are distinguished, respectively.[2]" Wikipedia

So factors are not identical to the chord tones, but the operations (inversions, extensions, alterations) seem the same. Only difference is including the 6th.
Does Barry Harris have something to do with this?

[Tal_175]

So factors are not identical to the chord tones, but the operations (inversions, extensions, alterations) seem the same. Only difference is including the 6th.
Does Barry Harris have something to do with this?

Precisely. Barry Harris was from an era when major 6 chords were the consonant 4 note major chords. He thought of the 7th as a "borrowed diminished note" with a tendency to resolve back to the 6th or the root. Overtime, the slight dissonance of the 7th became more "consonant" to the jazz world. I am not sure if Barry Harris actually heard major 7th chords as having a dissonant note but the major 6 is the foundation of his major harmonic organization because of this "purity".

[Mick-7]

When one plays descending F#-F-E-D#-C over F#7 apparently you see/hear Bmajor scale (the second bar), whereas to me that's one way of outlining the F#7 chord.

The complete line is: F#-F-E-D#-C#-B, and yes, it does look/sound like a B Major scale to me, as does the bar before it (probably because it is one). You may be the first person I've met who would consider that to be a good way to outline the V7 chord.

Or to you a descending Dmin7b5 arpeggio over Bb7 (as explained in my post #106) then would just be running Eb major scale whereas that's very clearly an Bb9 chord outline to me. I would actually play that voicing if I was comping as well. When I play Dmin7b5 chord over Bb7, I don't hear that I'm playing Eb major, that is the same when I outline the chord, I hear Bb9. But to you all that nuance collapses into one approximate scale over a bunch of chords.

Well of course, D-F-Ab-C is a Bb9 chord!

The point I was making has clearly been missed by you and others here. It goes back to the subject of this thread, practicing improvisation. If your primary approach to that is aural, or you want to take that approach, then devising a simple map to a tune's harmonic structure/tonal centers beforehand can be helpful. The simpler the map is, the better, so it will not distract you from focusing on playing by ear. Scales can serve as a simple resource for that, but being overly meticulous about applying them (e.g., using a chord tones vs scale approach), will undermine your intention to improvise by ear.

[pamosmusic]

The complete line is: F#-F-E-D#-C#-B, and yes, it does look/sound like a B Major scale to me, as does the bar before it (probably because it is one). You may be the first person I've met who would consider that to be a good way to outline the V7 chord.

Erm.

David Baker Bebop Scales — Barry Harris half-steps

David Baker, Barry Harris, and their million or so drones (myself included) come to mind.

[Mick-7]

Erm.

David Baker Bebop Scales — Barry Harris half-steps

David Baker, Barry Harris, and their million or so drones (myself included) come to mind.

Hardly unique, the #11th is the most common addition to the major scale.

[pamosmusic]

Hardly unique, the #11th is the most common addition to the major scale.

Right which is why I’m not sure why Tal is the only person you’ve heard refer to it this way?

Google the Bebop Scale

EDIT: The Bebop Scale

[Mick-7]

Right which is why I’m not sure why Tal is the only person you’ve heard refer to it this way?

Google the Bebop Scale

EDIT: The Bebop Scale

I see, did Baker name it that? - because the major/lydian scale has been around since the '50's.

[pamosmusic]

I see, did Baker name it that? - because the major/lydian scale has been around since the '50's.

the name “Bebop Scale,” yes but using that passing note has been common for a really long time. Longer than the fifties.

And if you check out his stuff, or Barry’s, in a casual way, you’d see that the rhythmic displacement offered by that extra is explicitly used as a way to outline dominant chords.

Based on their popularity and longevity it’s pretty safe to say that tons and tons and tons of people use them this way.

EDIT: it’s also not a “scale” in the conventional sense because that added note is conditional on the rhythmic placement of the line. So your approach to finding one scale or structure to encompass everything is almost inevitably going to miss things like that.

Id also note that a much simpler way of generalizing harmonically is available to us in the literature … Herb Ellis or Lester Young playing the rhythm changes … A section = tonic blues.

Easier, simpler, stylistically in keeping, and descriptive of the vocabulary it generates

[Tal_175]

The complete line is: F#-F-E-D#-C#-B, and yes, it does look/sound like a B Major scale to me, as does the bar before it (probably because it is one). You may be the first person I've met who would consider that to be a good way to outline the V7 chord.

I think Peter has already answered this one. The only thing I'd say is the B in the end of the line you have is actually on the up beat and it's half step appraoch to C natural. That's where the C minor line starts C-D- Eb etc.

Well of course, D-F-Ab-C is a Bb9 chord!

The point I was making has clearly been missed by you and others here. It goes back to the subject of this thread, practicing improvisation. If your primary approach to that is aural, or you want to take that approach, then devising a simple map to a tune's harmonic structure/tonal centers beforehand can be helpful. The simpler the map is, the better, so it will not distract you from focusing on playing by ear. Scales can serve as a simple resource for that, but being overly meticulous about applying them (e.g., using a chord tones vs scale approach), will undermine your intention to improvise by ear.

What you are talking about here key center soloing. Sort of like they way a rock or pop musicians solo. But playing the changes is a fundamental skill in jazz improvisation. That's why a lot of improvisation discussions on the forum are about chord tones, chord scales, bebop line building techniques etc.

[Mick-7]

What you are talking about here is key center soloing. Sort of like they way a rock or pop musicians solos. But playing the changes is a fundamental skill in jazz improvisation. That's why a lot of improvisation discussions on the forum are about chord tones, chord scales etc.

Yes, I could outline the changes if I want to, but my suggestion falls into your "aural" approach to improvisation category, not the theory category. When improvising by ear, I've found it's best to ignore the theory - at least until I'm done improvising and may want to dissect what I played.

[Tal_175]

Yes, I could outline the changes if I want to, but my suggestion falls into your "aural" approach to improvisation category, not the theory category. When improvising by ear, I've found it's best to ignore the theory - at least until I'm done improvising and may want to dissect what I played.

I think this discussion has drifted. I thought you were disagreeing with the idea that the second bar outlines the F#7 but you said that would be a B lydian of sorts. Also I thought we already clarified that the poll questions weren't about improvisation but they were about practice activities towards improvisation. So you can outline changes if you want to but that's not something you consider to be a relevant activity for practicing improvisation?
Also just curious, what do you think is happening in the last bar where Sonny Stitt plays a descending line from G with a chromatic passing note Gb over Dmin-G7. Do you think he is outlining G7 or is he playing some sort of C lydian? Could that possibly be seen as the bebop scale?

[Mick-7]

I think this discussion has drifted.

Yes, I think that debating Mr. Stitt's theoretical approach to improvisation is unproductive.

Also I thought we already clarified that the poll questions weren't about improvisation but they were about practice activities towards improvisation. So you can outline changes if you want to but that's not something you consider to be a relevant activity for practicing improvisation?

I already know how to outline the changes, doing more of it will not help me become a better improvisor. But playing what I hear in my head will be productive, thinking about theoretical strategies while I'm doing it will get in the way of that. Analyzing what I played afterwards can be useful though.

I'm in the aural category in your survey, if doing the sort of things you mentioned was an important part of my improv practice, I would have checked that box.

[Christian Miller]

It always seems to be that discussion of improvisation turns into a discussion of harmony. It is interesting to take harmony out of the equation sometimes to explore other aspects.

So, Stitt example looks like a mix of bebop/added note scale and chord tone improvisation at a glance.

Which is about what I’d expect. See also Hank Mobley, cannonball etc. if you were feeling uncharitable you could call it ‘bebop boilerplate.’

50s/second gen bop era jazz musicians were fairly similar and generic in their note choices. What made them original, compelling and instantly identifiable was often their sound and swing. Everyone studied the same Charlie Parker solos so there was a lot of uniformity in improvisational approach. You wouldn’t find many harmonic #11s on I chords in this style for instance.

They often look like on paper like they’ve been taking lessons from Barry Harris even when they definitely haven’t (although many did.)

This is the type of thing one would learn in Barry’s classes or a David Baker book, or through the time honoured II V approach. This is also why bop is still taught as the basis of modern jazz today - it is the root of what came later but also a finite style that is well suited to pedagogy.

Something noted by Cootie Williams who said, unfairly in my view, that after Bird everyone sounded the same. But if you compare the wide variety of approaches in the pre bop era you can see where he was coming from.

Many players who weren’t Barry seem to have got bored of it after ten years and moved on to post bop music of various kinds. OTOH Barry found great creativity within this bounded style.

Things were more diverse both before and after the bop era.

I think of this as a sort of ‘classical era’ of jazz, with the 60s being the ‘romantic era.’

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tal_175]

Yes, I think that debating Mr. Stitt's theoretical approach to improvisation is unproductive.



I already know how to outline the changes, doing more of it will not help me become a better improvisor. But playing what I hear in my head will be productive, thinking about theoretical strategies while I'm doing it will get in the way of that. Analyzing what I played afterwards can be useful though.

I'm in the aural category in your survey, if doing the sort of things you mentioned was an important part of my improv practice, I would have checked that box.

I feel like these have nothing to with what we were discussing . You have made several claims about Sonny Stitt's harmonic approach to soloing over the past few pages in reference to the transcription I posted. I believe these responses indicated a misunderstanding of jazz vocabulary and playing the changes. That's why I was going over his lines. But I am happy to drop this discussion.

[Tal_175]

I think of this as a sort of ‘classical era’ of jazz, with the 60s being the ‘romantic era.

This is very good way of putting it.
Though I'd say harmonic considerations and chord tones remained fairly central to jazz improvisation after 50's and 60's (to this day). In the 60's they would compose originals with slower harmonic rhythm as a way to find more freedom within the harmonic approach (sometimes reintroducing the faster moving harmonies in their solos).

The irony is nowadays people are told to learn language so they know how to use the chord-scales they practiced. They learn bebop language to find more creativity with chord-scales when one might argue that chord-scales emerged in an era when people were looking for creativity outside of the bebop language.

[Mick-7]

I feel like these have nothing to with what we were discussing . You have made several claims about Sonny Stitt's harmonic approach to soloing over the past few pages in reference to the transcription I posted. I believe these responses indicated a misunderstanding of jazz vocabulary and playing the changes. That's why I was going over his lines. But I am happy to drop this discussion.

Well, o.k., let's review what we discussed.... I said that all the notes that Sonny Stitt played could be found in certain scales (with occasional chromatic additions), which is true. You replied that such a general analysis is not informative. That is also true if one's improvisation, or practice of it, is primarily or partly theory driven. Mine is not, although it has been in the past, but even then I did not rely on it to learn "vocabulary," I let my ears reveal that. This is why I am largely ignorant about "bebop scale" terminology and such. My point was that my broad, non-informative "identify the main tonal centers" approach (map them out) is a good one for improvising by ear.

I imagine that when Charlie Parker arrived on the scene, he was chastised for "misunderstanding jazz vocabulary and not playing the changes." Ironically, his refusal to play by the rules turned out to be a God-send for guys like Barry Harris.

[pamosmusic]

Well, o.k., let's review what we discussed.... I said that all the notes that Sonny Stitt played could be found in certain scales (with occasional chromatic additions), which is true. You replied that such a general analysis is not informative. That is also true if one's improvisation, or practice of it, is primarily or partly theory driven. Mine is not now, although it has been in the past, but even then I did not rely on it to learn "vocabulary," I let my ears reveal that. This is why I am largely ignorant about "bebop scale" terminology and such. My point was that my broad, non-informative "identify the main tonal centers" approach (map them out) is a good one for improvising by ear.

I imagine that when Charlie Parker arrived on the scene, he was chastised for "misunderstanding jazz vocabulary and not playing the changes." Ironically, his refusal to play by the rules turned out to be a God-send for guys like Barry Harris.

I’ll also note that the tonal center you identified for a C major turnaround was Gm … based on a composite Gm scale that includes every note except for B, and then later offered a carve out for the fact that the passage included a B.

Totally get playing by ear but that just seemed a little confusing to me. Like … why pick a scale at all at that point?

[Mick-7]

I’ll also note that the tonal center you identified for a C major turnaround was Gm … based on a composite Gm scale that includes every note except for B, and then later offered a carve out for the fact that the passage included a B.

Totally get playing by ear but that just seemed a little confusing to me. Like … why pick a scale at all at that point?

I was actually falling asleep at the time I posted those comments, so if taken with a large whiff of nitrous oxide they'll make perfect sense.

[Navdeep_Singh]

My main reference or guide on improv is playing tunes. My main tool is rhythm (I imagine rhythmic hits and throw notes at them). My co-tool is learning the instrument in such a way that I don’t have to think about basic muscle memory of lines-dyads-chords.

I’ll always be learning tunes, I’ll always be learning the instrument. Thus, I’ll always be learning and hopefully improving on improvisation.

[princeplanet]

I would comfortably say that Stan Getz's primary reference wasn't theory in the practice room based on this anecdote, .

Download this free Getz style analysis, seems like he very much was aware of the changes and must have practiced for it (a lot!). The article goes on to say how Getz could also, when he wanted to (and seemed to prefer to after the early 50's) play "melodically". Dizzy said he was the best ever melodicist, but that's not to say he didn't grok the changes in his early years.

Stan Getz: Forgotten Bebop Tenor Saxophonist
|
IDEALS

[Mick-7]

I’ll also note that the tonal center you identified for a C major turnaround was Gm … based on a composite Gm scale that includes every note except for B, and then later offered a carve out for the fact that the passage included a B.

Totally get playing by ear but that just seemed a little confusing to me. Like … why pick a scale at all at that point?

Actually, I think this would be my simple simon harmonic map of the Sonny Stitt tune - although it could be even simpler, say C Major with appropriate Dom. 7th chord tones (C#, Ab, Bb) for the B section.
https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/atta...sonnystitt-jpg

A section:
|| B Major: 2 bars/ Bb Major: 2 bars/ A Major: 1 bar/ Ab Major: 1 bar/ G Major: 1 bar/ F# Major: 1 bar ||

B section:
| D Dorian-Melodic Minor: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar/ D Major: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar /
/ F Major: 1.5 bars / C Major-Harmonic Major: 2.5 bars (1/2 + 2) /
/ D Dorian-Melodic Minor: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar/ D Major: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar ||

[pamosmusic]

Actually, I think this would be my simple simon harmonic map of the Sonny Stitt tune - although it could be even simpler, say C Major with appropriate Dom. 7th chord tones (C#, Ab, Bb) for the B section.
https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/atta...sonnystitt-jpg

A section:
|| B Major: 2 bars/ Bb Major: 2 bars/ A Major: 1 bar/ Ab Major: 1 bar/ G Major: 1 bar/ F# Major: 1 bar ||

B section:
| D Dorian-Melodic Minor: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar/ D Major: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar /
/ F Major: 1.5 bars / C Major-Harmonic Major: 2.5 bars (1/2 + 2) /
/ D Dorian-Melodic Minor: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar/ D Major: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar ||

Man you’re thinking so hard about this you missed where it’s basically rhythm changes. Last 16.

See what I mean?

You’re so deep in the woods you lost the forest for the trees.

I haven’t gone back to listen with this transcription in hand, so it might be from a different recording, but for me, Eternal Triangle is from Sonny Side Up. Absolute all timer.

[Tal_175]

Actually, I think this would be my simple simon harmonic map of the Sonny Stitt tune - although it could be even simpler, say C Major with appropriate Dom. 7th chord tones (C#, Ab, Bb) for the B section.
https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/atta...sonnystitt-jpg

A section:
|| B Major: 2 bars/ Bb Major: 2 bars/ A Major: 1 bar/ Ab Major: 1 bar/ G Major: 1 bar/ F# Major: 1 bar ||

B section:
| D Dorian-Melodic Minor: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar/ D Major: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar /
/ F Major: 1.5 bars / C Major-Harmonic Major: 2.5 bars (1/2 + 2) /
/ D Dorian-Melodic Minor: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar/ D Major: 1 bar/ C Major: 1 bar ||

There is even a simpler harmonic mapping of Sonny Stitt's solo, the chromatic scale covers everything. 12 note harmony.
Depends on one's perception of harmonic nuances, mappings at different harmonic resolution levels are possible.

[Tal_175]

Download this free Getz style analysis, seems like he very much was aware of the changes and must have practiced for it (a lot!). The article goes on to say how Getz could also, when he wanted to (and seemed to prefer to after the early 50's) play "melodically". Dizzy said he was the best ever melodicist, but that's not to say he didn't grok the changes in his early years.

Stan Getz: Forgotten Bebop Tenor Saxophonist
|
IDEALS

He could have not know any theory and still have awareness of the changes and outlined them. I don't think of hearing and outlining changes as theory. No doubt there are different pathways to achieve this skill.