-
Just wanted to share some things I have been thinking about. I struggle with Improv and I am trying to construct a system for me that is optimized around using the ear to improv.
To that end, I am thinking of changing the way I think about things like scales and chords, etc, when improvising.
My plan is to try a key centered approach to improvising. What do I mean by that?
First we have the parent key with 7 notes numbered 1 to 7. Then for chords, I will related their notes to the parent key so for a V7, it's notes would be 5, 7, 2, 4, and a II7 would be 2, #4, b7, 1.
Similarly, let's say I want to play a dominant sound over the II7, I would just think of the parent scale with possibly some notes sharped or flatted like the #4 above.
I wonder if anyone has explored such an approach. Really, I think the benefit is that it will really let me focus on the sounds in the parent key of the different parts and see and hear the movements and resolutions better.
-
12-21-2025 02:52 PM
-
and the hope is that it will magically turn into jazz?
-
You can get a lot of mileage from key centers.
But I think you’re over complicating things by splitting it up by diatonic chords.
The thing about key centers is you can simplify things.
Ex.
| E-7 A-7 | D-7 G7 |
That’s all C major.
Eventually it gets stale, but everything does, that’s what is great about music, there’s always more to learn.
-
The hope is that I can start hearing things relationship to the parent key more easily. Right now, I feel like I have learned a lot of disconnected licks, phrases that go over this chord or that.
Originally Posted by djg
In other words, if I focus my attention on this maybe I can hear how phrases connect and relate better, and yes, hopefully play better.
-
Sure you can do that but, I want to make myself more aware of the relationships between the chord of the moment and the key center. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
If by key centers you mean tonal centers, than yes, it's a good approach. But I would also focus on chord tones, e.g., arpeggiate the chords in real time with a metronome and/or backing track. Originally Posted by charlieparker
-
Okay, I just saw key center and thought you were talking about something else.
I think you’re on the path to eventually learn the arpeggios of the diatonic chords, pull them from the major scale. Then examine how things connect.
I’m not trying to talk you out of your plan. But you don’t have to reinvent the wheel. There are plenty of books, courses and subscriptions on navigating changes.
You can take free courses here.
Best Harmony Courses & Certificates [2026] | Coursera
-
Well, I am trying to reinvent the wheel in that, I have tried a lot of approaches that haven't worked for me. I was mainly interested if others have explored this or found this fruitful. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
I haven't heard such an approach discussed much here, although rpjazzguitar's learn the spelling of everything is somewhat similar but instead of learning the spellings for each key, I plan to just use numbers.
-
Tonal centers can mean different things to different people. For instance, if we have a turnaround like iii VI ii V, that's all in the same key/tonal center for me as secondary dominants don't really introduce new tonal centers to my way of hearing. Originally Posted by Mick-7
-
I think you’re talking about regular diatonic harmony but using numbers instead of note names. I think eventually you’ll want to learn the note names. At which point you’ll be learning regular vanilla harmony. Foundational stuff, I’m not talking about jazz here. Just basic musicianship. The stuff you can’t skip, but guitar players always try to skip it. Originally Posted by charlieparker
-
Warren Nunes wrote a book called iirc, Improvisation with Correct Tonal Centers for Soloing, or words to that effect.
My approach, which I'm not suggesting is better than any other, is to be aware of the tonal center and the chord tones. You might not choose to do it, but, you could play through a ii V I in C by using only white keys -- while placing the chord tones for each chord on the strong beats. That might be worth working on as a bit of foundation.
Then, another case is the first two chords of All of Me. 8 beats of Cmaj followed by 8 beats of E7. So, for the Cmaj you play white keys. When you get to the E7, there's a black key in the chord. So, you can accommodate it by including a G#. Then you get to decide what to do about the G and the A. My inclination is to raise the G and keep the A. I digress. The point is that you're thinking "white keys and adjustments to accommodate the chord of the moment".
Next up is an A7. It has a C#, so you can raise the C to C#. That accommodates the new chord in a vanilla way.
You could, of course, think of fifth mode A harmonic minor for the E7. You get to the same notes thinking that way. I find it harder, but everybody is different.
If it helps you to think about the numbers as you suggest, sure. Whatever works.Last edited by rpjazzguitar; 12-21-2025 at 05:06 PM.
-
there are methods that work fine imo, like lee konitz' 10 step system, or the process as described by hal galper. or the fantastic videos by dennis chang. or the dutchbopper method of making every exercise a performance and record it to keep oneself honest. or linear expressions. stuff you can immediately use on the bandstand. studying along these lines plus the canon of recordings, it's hard to see how you wouldnt make huge progress with either of those paths. and all these paths are actually a lot of fun. Originally Posted by charlieparker
all this hearing stuff as a separate study is overrated, you are bound to pick up what you need to know and study while progressing. same with sight reading. it can be a hobby in itself but a hobby player should do the fun stuff. if the goal is to hear II7 better, you learn tunes that have that movement, ipanema, exactly like you, a train. watch what happens. live with it, sing the melodies, jam along, learn licks. read zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance
-
can you sing your telephone number? Originally Posted by charlieparker
-
I agree with everything dig said.
Also - a bit of time playing stuff at the piano is helpful on the ‘theory’ side.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
cp, I think you'll get the greatest mileage from knowing and playing chord tones. For example, take a chord form, like say Dmaj.7, make it D7, D7b9 [sub the b9 (Eb) for the root (D)], Dm7, etc. Take it through various chord progressions such as the cycle of 5ths: D > G > C, etc.
And you can ding three Birds with one tone: find the chord tones, think of the names of the notes, and learn to hear the different chord types: major, minor, dominant, diminished/altered.
-
I agreed with everything except the book. It should be called ‘I took Zen 101 and the art of blowing hot air up my own rear with a brief digression on why I’m also superior to BMW motorcycle owners.’ Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Your mind may know about naming and numbering things and relationships among things, but the ear does not know any verbal, numerical, visual modes of thought; the ear is phenomenological - the ear's whole universe is sounds. Originally Posted by charlieparker
However, if you take each sense domain and count the number of receptors that respond to different parts of each sense domain, you note something quite extraordinary about the sense of hearing... it is quite different from the others.
Sense - number of different reception domains
Sight - 4
Touch - 7
Taste - 26
Smell - 350
Sound - 16,000
You don't need to construct a system to play by ear; the ear has much more than that already built in waiting to go. Trust it! You get to playing by ear by doing it, always listening to every sound out of your instrument. You have to have faith in the existing potential of the ear, patience to learn to hear music as music, and lots of time on the instrument improvising.
-
knowing the relative major and minor, plus secondary relatives of key centres could simplify your improv.
-
An interesting thing about secondary dominants of II, III, V, VI in a major key is that you have an option to change the 3rd to the new #3 introduced or stick with the original scale tone which translates as a #9, a bluesy sound against the dominant.
-
If you are interested in jazz improvisation, then presumably you want your improvisation to be an expression of the style similar to what you hear on your favorite records.
So it's good to establish what this is not:
- Inserting licks or patterns in predetermined places in a paint by number manner.
- Noodling in a way that puts your fingers in charge. That means instead of playing what you hear, you play first then hear it, making adjustments to resolve clams based on what the rhythm section plays.
- Playing everything at a slow tempo (like 80 bpm). Those who are competent in the style are comfortable playing in faster tempos, even when playing ballads they frequently play in double time.
- Strictly key centered melodies.
Presumably you can already do all of the above but not satisfied with the outcome because those are not the goals but just things we do along the way in order to get better.
One way to describe the goal is to develop a reasonably diverse set of short melodic ideas that you can pre-hear and play. The process of choosing the next idea is by aural association with what you played before, the next harmonic event in the tune, something another instrument in the band played etc. When people get to the point where they can do that, they also start hearing other melodic ideas, quotes from another tunes melody, or a variation of what they played before etc.
I think this is where talent becomes a factor. Every musician even the most talented has a certain capacity for melodic ideas and aural imagination that they can access in the moment. People like Wes Montgomery or Joe Pass seem like they could freely access a large set of melodic ideas and quotes that they can play to match any harmonic situation. I think most people can get to a point where they can put together their melodic ideas in a way that is enjoyable to listen to by most who likes jazz.
To that end, I find it helpful to keep building on a small set of melodic building blocks to get to a point where I can use them to create longer 8th note lines in various harmonic situations. This is also the core idea of Barry Harris's approach to teaching improvisation. When I do that, not only I like my lines better but I feel more open the hear other ideas that flow naturally.Last edited by Tal_175; 12-22-2025 at 03:36 PM.
-
Well, when I hear melodies in my head it is usually around scale degrees. So if we are in Ab and you asked me what G, Eb, F , G, Ab sounds like I wouldn't have a clue because I would have to figure out the scale degrees. But of you told me it's 7-5-6-7-1, I could immediately hear that in my head. Originally Posted by pauln
I just started noticing, that I always have to do this translation process. Now when you are the guitar you have to translate shape to sound which is why playing on one string is sometimes easier.
I have a catalog of melodic patterns in terms of shapes and notes but I really want to know them as numbers. Then the question becomes do you use the numbers of the chord of the moment or the root key. In other words if I am learning a phrase over a II7, like a coltrane pattern should I think of it as 1-2-3-5 relative to the chord or, 2-3-#4-6 relative to the key?
Typically, I have done the former, but then you kind of end up with a chord scale approach. My hope was that the latter strategy would allow me to hear the differences of a 1-2-3-5 phrase over a II7 versus a V7.
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
I think I’m with you on this one. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
I don’t know about this, my inclination here is that this way lies madness.
Going chord by chord through a tune can be counter productive for sure, but there are more musical and intuitive ways of simplifying a tune and trying to hear the movements.
Like djg mentioned, trying to hear the individual notes in a change is probably misunderstanding how aural memory tends to work.
For that II7 you listen to A Train a lot and sing it and sing the bass movement and sing the weird note and then you listen to other stuff and when you’re listening to Ipanema, you go “hold up” … and you realize they sound the same.
Then you notice that the V chord in the cadence is a little different and the bass movement is cool and you listen to that a gazillion times.
Then you’re listening to Satin Doll and you realize it has that bass movement in the cadence and then you think maybe you’ve heard the bridge to that one before and you go back to A Train and focus on the bridge.
Rinse repeat.
We hear in bigger chunks generally than our traditional ear training methods sometimes allow for.
-
Absolutely. If one is playing by ear you are hearing in your mind's ear what you want to hear come out of the instrument. Then the worst possible method would be one in which something you did not want to hear or play (the reference diatonic notes or their numbers) was always the basis for having to do a translation process to play what you want to hear (the nondiatonic notes or numbers) out of the instrument. Originally Posted by pamosmusic
That might indicate a deep misunderstanding in what playing by ear means.
Playing by ear means never having to say
what key are we in?
what type of chord are we in?
what type of scale are we in?
Reply With Quote
Calling you Framus folk
Yesterday, 09:38 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos