-
I haven't made a point of substracting Levine's avoid notes from my 7 note scales and then practicing hexatonics. I know what an F sounds like against a Cmaj7 and I know what a C sounds like against a G7. It's the usual. Notes, especially non chord tones, come with context dependent baggage. If you don't like the sound, there are other notes.
But, the concept of hexatonics makes sense to me.
There are chord tones and there are non-chord tones. The chord tones are going to sound consonant even in the solo of a beginner. The 9 and 13 don't require a lot of special consideration. You can lean on them while you think about something else, and they won't sound terrible. Against a major chord, you're going to have to be careful about both altered 9ths because they won't automatically sound okay. If you want a vanilla sound, you use the correct 7th. The altered 5ths can sound good, but the result won't sound like a vanilla major chord. I see the 4th against a major chord in that light.
So, it's vanilla, rocky road and, at the extreme, pickle flavored ice cream. Hextonics give you vanilla.
-
12-29-2025 07:12 PM
-
If we are going to discuss hexatonics I’d like to do so in another thread. It’s not got anything to do with the video above
I’m aware that’s a bit hypocritical, but there you go.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I hope I can be forgiven a bit of pedantry. There is a lovely definition of "theory" in the sciences that I love. A good theory is a model we construct that (a) accounts for all the data we observe (b) enables predictions about future phenomena in the realm related to the theory (and is therefore testable and refutable) and so therefore (c) is self-correcting.
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
I think these all apply to "jazz theory." A theory about jazz is a model constructed from observing (i.e. listening analytically to a ton of jazz playing), it allows predictions, i.e. when we use the theory to improvise (future music) we get good results, and if more jazz playing turns up that conflicts with the model, we try to alter the model to accommodate it, or in extreme cases, replace the model with a better one.
Schoolmarm Mode Switch reset to "off" position.
-
Yeah... I think part of my annoyance at a lot of music theory is that you can take the boy out of STEM but you can't take the STEM out of the boy. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
From a scholarship point of view, I've only found one book written to a high academic standard on jazz improvisation which is Berliner's Thinking Jazz. (It's also very readable by a miracle.) Most jazz improv books have historical inaccuracies, factoids, anecdote and opinion presented as fact, and a general lack of citations. You have to take them with a pinch of salt as homespun takes on the craft of playing music, however they end up being presented but the publisher. (Which would be fine if people perceived them that way.)
In a practical sense, who cares if people can play? Plenty of players read Levine's books and sound killing. (OTOH I wonder how many end up in the weeds worrying about stuff that isn't important.)
But Barry has codified a set of practices and ideas that basically encapsulate the common practice of jazz from 1948-1959. It's modelled specifically on Bird (and Bud) but so was everyone else, so it works. It comes from study of the music in great detail.
The other theory stuff I've come across in jazz seems to relate much less well to the notes on the records, unless those notes were played by someone like Kurt Rosenwinkel, say, who learned CST. When I transcribe Kurt, all the CST stuff is completely relevant and accurate because that's exactly how he thinks.
Wes Montgomery? Less so.
-
I'm not sure that hexatonic scales are completely irrelevant to your point, Christian, in that there is one unconventional note in your b5 sub dominant scale (e.g., Db7 dominant scale over G7), i.e., the note Gb/F#, the 4th degree "avoid note" of the Db dominant scale, which would be a major 7th over the G7 chord. Someone who is inexperienced at using it may want to omit it, at first anyway: voila, a hexatonic scale. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
You could also just raise the root of the Gb major scale (4th of the Db7 scale) a 1/2 step to G, which gives you the Ab melodic minor scale, the altered scale sans the major 7th, but then we'd be getting into the sort of scale histrionics you're trying to avoid. (The histrionic scale is actually my favorite.
)
Also, some people here are not following your thesis, as they've commented that one's improvisation would be too "vanilla" sounding if one used the dominant scale alone. There is nothing vanilla about playing a Gb major scale over a G7 chord - rocky road maybe but not vanilla.
-
Just so we're clear, none of this stuff is my theory or my scales. Originally Posted by Mick-7
I'm not sure that hexatonic scales are completely irrelevant to your point, Christian, in that there is one unconventional note in your b5 sub dominant scale (e.g., Db7 dominant scale over G7), i.e., the note Gb/F#, the 4th degree "avoid note" of the Db dominant scale, which would be a major 7th over the G7 chord. Someone who is inexperienced at using it may want to omit it, at first anyway: voila, a hexatonic scale.
You could also just raise the root of the Gb major scale (4th of the Db7 scale) a 1/2 step to G, which gives you the Ab melodic minor scale, the altered scale sans the major 7th, but then we'd be getting into the sort of scale histrionics you're trying to avoid. (The histrionic scale is actually my favorite. )
Barry Harris specifically said that the F# in the tritone scale was "beautiful". The last class I attended of his was focussed on leading a B arpeggio on a G7 chord into a Cm. He actively sought those sounds out. These wrangles about 4ths or major 7ths on dominant chords aren't concerns that come up in his approach, which is what I'm trying to represent here.
So this is all stuff you are bringing into it from a purely theoretical perspective. It's not unusual for people to do this, but it's a bit of a waste of intellectual energy and gets in the way. I do understand the impulse to relate new things to prior knowledge, but often it can be best to come into a novel approach tabula rasa and make connections later on.
The Barry thing is a self contained and highly specific way of teaching, it doesn't really work if you bring preconceptions from other areas of jazz theory, especially as some of it flatly contradicts.
The best thing I can say is - come in fresh, and give it a try on its own terms. Or not.
Maybe they didn't get to that bit.Also, some people here are not following your thesis, as they've commented that one's improvisation would be too "vanilla" sounding if one used the dominant scale alone. There is nothing vanilla about playing a Gb major scale over a G7 chord - rocky road maybe but not vanilla.Last edited by Christian Miller; 12-30-2025 at 01:38 PM.
-
Right, but he did resolve the major 7th (F#) in the Gb major scale to G in the next chord (Cm), not just leave it hanging. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
The clue is in the text that I posted? Originally Posted by Mick-7
You are still getting caught up in the theory stuff. You are looking for an explanation. Truth be told Barry wasn't big on explanations. He'd just say, play this one it's real pretty.
Now I can give you a lengthy explanation involving the words 'resolution of neighbour tones in an implied polyphony' and the assertion 'that's how the altered scale works anyway' and also the jaw breaker 'linear expression of the maximally efficient tonal chromatic cadence.'
Barry said none of these things however.
How about - "it sounds super hip."
-
Actually, you did address this about 8.5 minutes into your video, I didn't get that far before. And as you said, every scale tone has its resolutions. Was the melodic minor scale not part of Barry's system? Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Don’t know actually Originally Posted by Mick-7
He mentioned it a couple of times in lessons. There’s no reason you couldn’t use it. Follow the rules and you’d get all the usual applications in the books. Otoh the added note rules and so on work fine.
However I never heard him discuss it. His go to scale for both minor chords and what I call ‘applied minor’ (eg Dm6 or Abm6 on G7) was the minor 6th diminished scale.
(Which is weird because he used regular seven note scales for major and dominant. I guess he just liked that one more.)
Min6-dim is like a melodic minor with an added b6.
But that’s the next step when you’ve spent a while with the dominant scale. And honestly mostly he taught dominant scale for lines in lessons (I think we weren’t his most advanced class tho lol). He used the min6-dim more for I minor lines, and an awful lot for chords/harmony, where it gets interesting!
(He taught harmony and improvisation in separate lessons.)
Howard Rees describes Abm6-dim on G7 as the ‘perfect altered scale’ because it also includes the natural 13th alongside the usual altered scale notes, which is so common in jazz (13b9.)
However AFAIK I think that was his own interpretation of it?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Cool video, I could stand to do more mapping over changes like you showed. Seems like something I could spend a few minutes working out on paper then run with it. Honeysuckle Rose has 4 ii V's in a row I can brothers and sisters through. I think, I'll have to watch that part again.
I liked the circus song and the improv at the end too. I think it's nice to hear the concept in action.
-
When I’m doing the old school thing I just like to play C7 for four bars on Honeysuckle. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
The circus song is Jean Phillip Sousa’s the Thunderer haha. The US armed forces are deeply offended.
OTOH the original name of the circus music we all know is ‘entrance of the gladiators’ which I find hilarious because it suggests the composer intended it as a serious and dramatic piece of music. They should have put it in Gladiator 2
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
What about bars 5-8?
| F | Bb | F | C7|
Something like that, vanilla all the way?
-
Yeah, I mean I might use a G7 or Db7 to set up the next pass, or F7 down to the third of D7 if I’m doing the II V thing Originally Posted by AllanAllen
Also Bb7 in bar 6 maybe
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I’m going to run this tonight.
-
As Bb6 in bar 6 is basically Gm7, a classic BH approach might look like this:
Playing over Bb7 in bar 6, as suggested by Christian, can bring out a more blues quality (3rd=A moving to b3=Ab). This is also in line with the standard harmonic moves of bar 5-6 (F6 F7 | Bb6 Bo7 | or F6 F7 | Bb6 Bb-6) that carry the Ab throughout.
It's worth noting that Fats himself sometimes played a secondary dominant in bar 6 (G7-C7). I've even seen modern lead sheets where, reconfigured as a Bm7b5, it replaces the C7 (Bb6-Bm7b5) to more closely reflect the melodic phrase at that point: A-G-F-D.
-
Didn’t end up calling Honeysuckle Rose. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
lol I feel like all of the best musicians I've played with, especially older dudes, say stuff like this and it's true. Theory is fun to a point but some people let themselves get so in the weeds they forget what the goal is. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Thanks for the video, still working my way through it but opening some doors to new sounds along the way.
Reply With Quote
Calling you Framus folk
Yesterday, 09:38 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos