-
Not really … I’m hearing mostly blues vocab over bars 1-5 and you hitting that Edim in bar 6.
Originally Posted by buduranus2
That’s a really common way of handling it and is kind of my point.
Its not nailing every change but its very nice playing and very clearly rhythm changes
-
08-03-2025 10:58 AM
-
What’s the point of going CST over Rhythm Changes?
Bb Gm Cm F7 are all Bb major.
-
I kind of hear Trane doing that, though he often chooses to base a lot of his RC stuff on Bb mixolydian.
It’s important to bear in mind that first chord often has more of a Bb6 quality.
Also in terms of the actual changes of RC, it’s all over the map.
In the early days you had things like
Bb Bo | C-7 C#o7 | Bb/D Dbo7 | C-7 F7
Bb Bb/Ab | Eb/G Gb7 | Bb F7 | Bb
Or
Bb Bb/D | Eb Eo7 | Bb/F Gb7 | C-7 F7 x 2
You have RC that never goes to the IV but is just a 1-6-2-5 four times
In the early days a lot of the harmony was based around the baseline. This was in the days before improvised walking bass.
What you don’t tend to find is the ‘standard jazz school’ version of the changes with those awkward jumps
F-7 Bb7 | Eb^7 Ab7 | D-7 G7 etc
Yeck
The Sher new real book has good changes for bop era RC
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I guess you have the statistics on that. However I hear pianists playing the changes all the time. Not saying that all pianist use CST, but a lot do. To each their own. Originally Posted by pamosmusic
-
Personally if I was going to use CST in rhythm changes as opposed to the usual sort of vocab/subs approach, it would require a simplification or abstraction of the changes so that I could get the most out of them.
So that’s always been a thing as others have pointed out above you can abstract the thing to a I chord or maybe a I-IV-I thing and play modally or bluesily or both, but you can alternatively focus on the altered dominant over the whole A section for instance. You could also use modal interchange and play something else over the I for the whole A section. Maybe Phrygian dominant or the half-whole or something.
But in terms of use a chord scale approach on each chord of the tune? I’ve never been able to get much out of it. Maybe in terms of being a way to understand chord subs - D-on Bb, Db- on G7 etc - but it’s a lot of notes to get in there with a seven note pitch set.
At most I’d be more like Bb Ionian for a bar, F altered for a bar etc rather than every chord.
Anyway It’s not the way that would lead you to an idiomatic bop based approach imo which is what a lot of players are going for with RC specifically. Not that that is the be all or end all.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Not all versions of RC are that simplified. But lets say all of them are. Playing Bb Ionian, or any other single key, over them does not, but can, emphasize the chord tones that aid in melodicity (legit word? Dunno). Thinking and playing the scales for each chord tends to emphasize the chord tones, making for a better solo IMO. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
I strive to be able to play a solo that stand alone, no harmony, reveals the individual chords, even if they're all in the same key, perhaps especially so as otherwise it becomes a musical smear to my ears.
Besides, what does one do when each chord change is a different key OR one is playing solo guitar and providing all the harmony, rhythm, and melody?
-
Tbh I learned RC from Barry Harris and he knocks it down to a scale a measure basically.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Someone should make a video about…. Never mind. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
And, as it turns out, that B natural is coming on the 3rd bar, exactly as you Christian and Barry said. Here are the first 8 bars at a woefully slow speed. Originally Posted by CliffR
Ha! Thanks boss. I'll have to re-watch this. But in today's version of Bird's solo on Dexterity, he is indeed playing the B natural
.
@Guy - personally, I think one of the great things about Bird's solos are that they sound great even at a slow tempo.
-
I find that getting Charlie Parker's rhythmic feel correct is more difficult than playing the notes. Originally Posted by CliffR
-
nice work! Originally Posted by CliffR
-
Thanks! Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
Maybe still worth studying for vocab, without any expectation of nailing his feel? Originally Posted by GuyBoden
-
Sure, we have arpeggios, we will always have arpeggios (especially in Paris), and Christian can correct if I'm wrong but I don't believe they thought in terms of CST back then. Originally Posted by CliffR
-
We weren't talking about CST (chord scale theory) we were talking about chord tone soloing - ie using chord tones in one's solos to outline the changes. Originally Posted by Mick-7
-
If I was trying to nail every change and took some time to plan, it might look like this.
If the second chord is G7, I'd think Bb tonal center, but there's no Eb or Bb. So, rather than think G mixo, I'd think, Bb tonal center, but consider adjusting Bb to B and Eb to E.
Of course, these adjustments might not be necessary. Without them it could be heard as G7#9b13 which would be worth considering.
Then there's the issue of getting various chord tones on strong beats, if that's what you want to do. Knowing the chord tones and the tonal center helps with that. If that's the same thing as people mean by using CST, great.
-
It's closely related: chord vs scale - such-n-such scale/scale tones go with such-n-such chord, this chord came from this scale, etc. Originally Posted by CliffR
-
Which as far as I know was not really the way people thought about this music, at very least till George Russel appeared. Or at least how they talked about it. Originally Posted by Mick-7
-
I slow down a short phrase I like, then repeatedly play along with the phrase until I get the correct time/feel. Originally Posted by CliffR
I play it repeatedly for weeks so it's embedded into my subconscious. Nowadays, I play a few Charlie Parker phrases during live improv.
Personally, learning a whole solo was quickly forgotten, but repeatedly playing along with a short phrase for weeks locks the phrase into my memory. IMHO we all have different learning styles.
It's only a hobby.
-
No I don’t think they did Originally Posted by Mick-7
But… it would be foolish to think they didn’t think in scales. Bird clearly plays out of scales all the time alongside chord tones. He clearly knew about all the classical options.
The problem is talk of chord scales suck the oxygen out of the conversation because people assume it’s the same thing. But chord scales aren’t really scales at all - they are systems of seven notes associated with a given chord that can be played in scale steps or some other intervals.
Scale use in music for the past few centuries was designed around linking and ornamenting chord tones really. You said the chords for a given bit of music would belong to a major or minor key (give or take a sharp or flat here and there) and you could use major or minor scale steps within the key to link the chord tones together. It’s a big chunk of Western music, including jazz.
Nothing to do with modes or extensions. Just connecting tissue. Certainly something worth working with regards to playing classic Rhythm Changes stuff.
This is what Bach did, this is what Rogers and Hart did, this is what Bird did. The scale steps don’t belong to the chords per se, in the way they do in chord scales. Musicians got good at linking chord tones with scale runs.
OTOH jazz introduced of playing different chords against each other which is something quite different from European music. I think this happened naturally due to the way jazz was created - not composed by one person, but co created by the ensemble.
Some of these choices were conscious chord subs, and some may have been the result of using differing versions of the same changes. Some of these choices got folded in to CST as a sort of unified theory, the tritone sub ‘coming from the altered scale’ and so on, but this was a later invention and seems to me have missed out some aspects.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Most players either develop melodically, (which generally implies simple harmonic references). Or actually develop Harmonically... both usually need to be related to the FORM
If your looking for CS thing..... It would be using both... the notes or scales with relationships to the basic changes and also to the expansion of the chords. Most jazz players hear or think with Chord Patterns or series of chords that imply Harmonic Target... can be a note or a chord. Can be played of implied.
The next step is using space or Form to organize the use of those chord patterns.... or Notes which imply Chord Patterns. (I'm not implying there aren't melodic relationships).
Generally you need to start with reference... Like what Perter said, most bop changes imply simple Blues functional changes... I IV V etc. Then you begin to learn Chord Patterns which will expands those simple changes and open the doors to more possibilities of Harmonic References which organize the relationship... using CS types of understandings.
This can be really difficult...
-
I can't think of an example where a player plays all the chords all the time. But I think it's fairly common to find examples where the player references the changes often enough, that I assume it's a conscious choice when they dont. Not playing the change, when you choose to, is also playing it, so to speak.
These two for instance, where the players dip in and out of the changes at will.
-
20-25+ years ago, I seriously studied CST using scales from the Major modes, Harmonic and Melodic minor modes. I found that knowing the Arpeggios for each scale/chord relationship was essential to outline the chord changes using CST.
But, I asked my highly regarded CST teacher at the time, "What about additional chromatic notes?"
This highly regarded teacher had no real answer to my additional chromatic question and replied "put them where you think fits the music".
So, the main reason I don't use CST is because CST has no additional Chromatic notes.
-
You're having a laugh, Colin Robinson. Originally Posted by Mick-7
-
You can use the Barry harris added note rules with chord scales. For example if you have the altered add in notes between 1 and b7 when descending for a very simple example. Or any of the more complex rules. Originally Posted by GuyBoden
But the Barry stuff is looser than it might look at first glance. I like the way he teaches though because he gives you something very concrete that sounds good right away and then loosens it up later.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
Calling you Framus folk
Yesterday, 09:38 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos