The Jimmy Raney Book Study Group

[CliffR]

Swinging line. Maybe the swingiest phrase I’ve heard you play. Starting on the and’s helps. Rhythm makes all the difference. I agree about starting with Chapter 2, but I’ve been chopping at the bit about that since we’ve started.

Chapter 1 is a good overview, but we get into the language of rhythm in chapter 2. Swing is a result of all of these rhythmic devices making mixed into the rue of the groove. Let’s get beyond the lives of two consecutive eighth notes!

Thanks Pick! I'm really hoping we hear more contributions from the others on this thread.

[RaneyJR]

Here's another one. I'm thinking maybe it's time to move on to chapter two.

I like the fact that this is a little akilter rhythmically - the strong accent on beat 2. Has an element of surprise. The only thing that I noticed was that the ending feels unfinished? up in the air, perhaps.

You might also experiment with C# D# in lieu of your C D in last bar - based on what was mentioned in regards to b9 #9

But any rate, keep going. Sounds good!

[CliffR]

I like the fact that this is a little akilter rhythmically - the strong accent on beat 2. Has an element of surprise. The only thing that I noticed was that the ending feels unfinished? up in the air, perhaps.

You might also experiment with C# D# in lieu of your C D in last bar - based on what was mentioned in regards to b9 #9

But any rate, keep going. Sounds good!

Thanks Jon. Good idea about the b9 #9 and, yeah, I hear what you mean about the up-in-the-air quality at the end. I remember now, I end on the D because the section of A Foggy Day I was working from had a D as the last note, pushed to the end of the third bar and sustained into the fourth. I guess I still don't really know how to resolve to a 9.

I'm enjoying working through your dad's solo in chapter two right now.

[CliffR]

I'm curious to know if the solo in chapter two was composed especially from the book, or if it's from a recording? Some of it sounds familiar, but my googling has failed to find a Jimmy Raney version of Here's That Rainy Day.

[David B]

I'm curious to know if the solo in chapter two was composed especially from the book, or if it's from a recording? Some of it sounds familiar, but my googling has failed to find a Jimmy Raney version of Here's That Rainy Day.

I don't have the book with me to check if the solo lines up, but Jimmy Raney did record Here's That Rainy Day on 'Live in Tokyo'.

[CliffR]

I don't have the book with me to check if the solo lines up, but Jimmy Raney did record Here's That Rainy Day on 'Live in Tokyo'.

Thanks, I'll check that out. I've been listening to him on Spotify, so it's possible I've heard it, but I usually don't look at which song is playing because I tend to listen while I'm cooking or walking.

[RaneyJR]

I'm curious to know if the solo in chapter two was composed especially from the book, or if it's from a recording? Some of it sounds familiar, but my googling has failed to find a Jimmy Raney version of Here's That Rainy Day.

Nope, he just wrote something out for the book demonstrating the principles from earlier in the chapter.

You might be interested in this new live video that came out with Doug and Jimmy on tour in Netherlands 1981. I've queued Here's that Rainy Day. Similar to Live in Tokyo here.

[CliffR]

Nope, he just wrote something out for the book demonstrating the principles from earlier in the chapter.

You might be interested in this new live video that came out with Doug and Jimmy on tour in Netherlands 1981. I've queued Here's that Rainy Day. Similar to Live in Tokyo here.

Fantastic! Thank you!

[CliffR]

Little line based on figure 2-5, with groups of mostly 3 notes.

[GuyBoden]

Little line based on figure 2-5, with groups of mostly 3 notes.

Good stuff Cliff, nice to hear you using the metronome, which, as we all know, is essential for practicing.

I know you're playing an exercise, but I like to start Jazz phrases with a leading note on the 'and' beats.

An easy exercise is counting and clapping with the metronome using (and 1)(and 2)(and 3)(and 4).

Personally, I think phrases sound better when they start on the 'and' beats.

Seems an interesting book.

Edit: I'm sure that this is a Hal Galper exercise, clapping with the metronome using (and 1)(and 2)(and 3)(and 4).

[PickingMyEars]

The leading note is a sound, if you want chord tones to line up with the beat. That is an important sound. That is ONE sound. My studies of Barry Harris and elsewhere confirm that there is another sound. Chord tones can and SHOULD be placed on the "and" without any leading tone preparation. Going back to that Jimmy Raney audio recorded lesson from a while back, he suggested that we get comfortable with BOTH sounds. Don't want to settle for flat footed floogies. Sounds too academic and tied up with a bow. Might be theoretically correct, but the rhythmic schema lacks the PUSH and forward motion. Matters how you resolve everything at the end of your phrase, harmonically and rhythmically.

Not everyone enjoys Benny G's teaching style, but I think he is one of the few to challenge the "flat footed" approach to always lining up chord tones on the beat:

Speaking for myself to get out of "we" territory, the most important element of rhythm to get in my GUT is the downbeat--the first beat of the measure. Honestly, the downbeat is the most challenging rhythmic cue to feel as I play more advanced syncopation. Displacement, poly rhythm, and metric modulation only further to obscure that downbeat and can trip me up if I am not fully focused. Jimmy Raney might have sounded like he was floating above the time with all of his rhythmic gymnastics, but he was in TOTAL control. Same with Bill Evans, Sonny Rollins, Charlie Parker, and all those adventurous rhythmic geniuses.

A huge part of that is how I ground myself with the downbeat. To my ear, Jimmy Raney isn't floating at all--he's creating rhythmic TENSION. The downbeat is the resolution. Doesn't mean everything resolves to the ONE, but I need to know where that beat is at all times.

For me, that is what makes these rhythmic figures difficult--that I don't lose track of the downbeat. When I play out at a jam session or small gig, I won't have a metronome to keep track of the downbeat. Barry Harris and Jimmy Raney seemed to be very aware of the downbeat in their pedagogy and playing.

Right now, CliffR is the only person actively engaging in this thread. He's brave enough to post. I can already hear improvements to his rhythm in these progressive posts. I gotta get in the game, now that I've got my land legs back!

[GuyBoden]

The leading note is a sound, if you want chord tones to line up with the beat. That is an important sound. That is ONE sound. My studies of Barry Harris and elsewhere confirm that there is another sound. Chord tones can and SHOULD be placed on the "and" without any leading tone preparation. Going back to that Jimmy Raney audio recorded lesson from a while back, he suggested that we get comfortable with BOTH sounds. Don't want to settle for flat footed floogies. Sounds too academic and tied up with a bow. Might be theoretically correct, but the rhythmic schema lacks the PUSH and forward motion. Matters how you resolve everything at the end of your phrase, harmonically and rhythmically.

Not everyone enjoys Benny G's teaching style, but I think he is one of the few to challenge the "flat footed" approach to always lining up chord tones on the beat:

Speaking for myself to get out of "we" territory, the most important element of rhythm to get in my GUT is the downbeat--the first beat of the measure. Honestly, the downbeat is the most challenging rhythmic cue to feel as I play more advanced syncopation. Displacement, poly rhythm, and metric modulation only further to obscure that downbeat and can trip me up if I am not fully focused. Jimmy Raney might have sounded like he was floating above the time with all of his rhythmic gymnastics, but he was in TOTAL control. Same with Bill Evans, Sonny Rollins, Charlie Parker, and all those adventurous rhythmic geniuses.

A huge part of that is how I ground myself with the downbeat. To my ear, Jimmy Raney isn't floating at all--he's creating rhythmic TENSION. The downbeat is the resolution. Doesn't mean everything resolves to the ONE, but I need to know where that beat is at all times.

For me, that is what makes these rhythmic figures difficult--that I don't lose track of the downbeat. When I play out at a jam session or small gig, I won't have a metronome to keep track of the downbeat. Barry Harris and Jimmy Raney seemed to be very aware of the downbeat in their pedagogy and playing.

Right now, CliffR is the only person actively engaging in this thread. He's brave enough to post. I can already hear improvements to his rhythm in these progressive posts. I gotta get in the game, now that I've got my land legs back!

Well done excellent analysis, when I looked at this thread I was tempted to join in, but I knew that the "Jimmy Raney" book would be too advanced for my very limited playing ability.

"Jimmy Raney" was the most advanced Bebop guitar player. IMHO.

It seems to be a very good book, well done to all participants.

All good stuff.

[CliffR]

I too like to start phrases on the up-beat, but here I was following the specific rhythm in the book's example.

Regarding getting back to the 1 after syncopation, there's a note in the 'things to think about' section that says 'make sure you know how to get back to beat 1 when you do odd meter tricks'. I think that short sentence might involve a *lot* of work

(I'm a big fan of Benny G's videos)

Thanks both, btw, for the encouragement.

[CliffR]

Well done excellent analysis, when I looked at this thread I was tempted to join in, but I knew that the "Jimmy Raney" book would be too advanced for my very limited playing ability.

"Jimmy Raney" was the most advanced Bebop guitar player. IMHO.

It seems to be a very good book, well done to all participants.

All good stuff.

I don't know that we have to be playing at Jimmy Raney speed to benefit from the ideas in the book. I can't see myself getting up to that speed, for sure . Why not give it a go?

[RaneyJR]

Little line based on figure 2-5, with groups of mostly 3 notes.

Hi Cliff,

For a Bar 1 blues thing this works just fine. Again I'm hearing a more emphatic finish possible from the logic of the 3's line where you're moving up (you go up to A then Bb, why not continue to B natural strong accent and ultimately C?) and then possibly bluesy ending lick to finish going to Bar 5. I could write out what I'm hearing but I'd rather you work towards it. Also don't feel the need to hit the tonic of the IV. You could use the b7 too, for example.

For me, even when doing an exercise always push for something a little more emphatic that inspires the imagination.

[CliffR]

Hi Cliff,

For a Bar 1 blues thing this works just fine. Again I'm hearing a more emphatic finish possible from the logic of the 3's line where you're moving up (you go up to A then Bb, why not continue to B natural strong accent and ultimately C?) and then possibly bluesy ending lick to finish going to Bar 5. I could write out what I'm hearing but I'd rather you work towards it. Also don't feel the need to hit the tonic of the IV. You could use the b7 too, for example.

For me, even when doing an exercise always push for something a little more emphatic that inspires the imagination.

Hi Jon,

Thanks for the feedback. I missed a trick with the B natural for sure. For the final bar, I did try and come up with something to land on the b7, but couldn't quite make it work. I'll try both of those ideas today.

[RaneyJR]

Right now, CliffR is the only person actively engaging in this thread. He's brave enough to post. I can already hear improvements to his rhythm in these progressive posts. I gotta get in the game, now that I've got my land legs back!

Yes, this is quite true. It's always easier to talk about doing something than actually doing it. My impression of this Workshop here is that everyone will trying to be doing something that reflects the principles of the book.

In this Chapter the goal would be - make sure you can play the examples - or perhaps sing them.

For example sing 123 123 etc. while replicating the pitches while tapping 4 fingers in 4/4. Slow it down to a crawl until you get it in your system.

Once it's in the "system" it becomes a thing that can inspire variations.

In my videos (not to keep quoting myself...sorry) I try to reflect being a student of the materials as I go through them. I hashed through them a bit so I wasn't playing something shitty that everyone else could hear on the Internet lol

[CliffR]

So maybe something more like this?

FWIW I don't feel 'brave' posting these. I'm very glad to have the feedback, particularly from the co-author of the book we're studying here!

[RaneyJR]

So maybe something more like this?

FWIW I don't feel 'brave' posting these. I'm very glad to have the feedback, particularly from the co-author of the book we're studying here!

yes much better! I was hearing the B natural as part of another ascending 3. Then holding it and resolving as neighbor (D B C)

[CliffR]

yes much better! I was hearing the B natural as part of another ascending 3. Then holding it and resolving as neighbor (D B C)

Thanks! Yeah, I see what you're saying. So up to Ab, then up to Bb, then up to B. I'll give that a whirl. (I probably won't post another variant, however - it feels like time to come up with another idea on the same exercise.)

[PickingMyEars]

So maybe something more like this?

FWIW I don't feel 'brave' posting these. I'm very glad to have the feedback, particularly from the co-author of the book we're studying here!

Damn, that sounds swinging now!

I was having a lot of fun with the "harmonic dislocation" figures.

For now, I am using a SLOW metronome to get a click on the ONE (25 = downbeat for 100bpm, for example) and really trying to hear the displacement as I play it on the page. Displacing to the TWO should sound different than the "and of 4" and so on in these examples. When I get it right, each example has a different swinging flavor. When I get it wrong, everything sounds the same.

[CliffR]

Damn, that sounds swinging now!

I was having a lot of fun with the "harmonic dislocation" figures.

For now, I am using a SLOW metronome to get a click on the ONE (25 = downbeat for 100bpm, for example) and really trying to hear the displacement as I play it on the page. Displacing to the TWO should sound different than the "and of 4" and so on in these examples. When I get it right, each example has a different swinging flavor. When I get it wrong, everything sounds the same.

Thanks! Please post some of your work! I'll look into the harmonic dislocation in due course. I have a feeling it's already an unintended 'feature' of my improv

[RaneyJR]

Damn, that sounds swinging now!

I was having a lot of fun with the "harmonic dislocation" figures.

For now, I am using a SLOW metronome to get a click on the ONE (25 = downbeat for 100bpm, for example) and really trying to hear the displacement as I play it on the page. Displacing to the TWO should sound different than the "and of 4" and so on in these examples. When I get it right, each example has a different swinging flavor. When I get it wrong, everything sounds the same.

I think using the vocal exercise where you count the beats and sing the pitches is helpful

so the displacement is sung:

"2 and 3 and 4 and 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and 1 and 2..." For example on the first rhythm changes exercise. He would often demo that vocally.

The second RC example is demo'd here with the and of 4 and then the and of 1. I've queued it to the spot where it was counted vocally. It feels somewhat mechnical - but the vocalizing of beats helps ground you- at least I think

[lawson-stone]

Well done excellent analysis, when I looked at this thread I was tempted to join in, but I knew that the "Jimmy Raney" book would be too advanced for my very limited playing ability.

"Jimmy Raney" was the most advanced Bebop guitar player. IMHO.

It seems to be a very good book, well done to all participants.

All good stuff.

I've been swamped with work and family obligations but have the book on my music stand and want to dive in. I still think of the most fruitful time in my whole experience of learning jazz guitar was the time spend learning the solos in the Jamie Aebersold "Jimmy Raney" volume. Wow. Could only manage 4 measures per week so it took a while, but my playing in all other departments leveled up sharply as a result of doing that.

[RaneyJR]

.. the most fruitful time in my whole experience of learning jazz guitar was the time spend learning the solos in the Jamie Aebersold "Jimmy Raney" volume. Wow. Could only manage 4 measures per week so it took a while, but my playing in all other departments leveled up sharply as a result of doing that.

True enough! The new book does quote several examples from it. The How About You and Nowhere solos from Aebersold feature pretty prominently in excerpts. He also used the Aebersold book to demonstrate concepts in lessons - that is actually documented. Like zooming in on some of the preparatory things said in the introduction of the Aebersold book. The goal he started in the new book was to try to get to the essence of line creation - or at least what his particular approach was. Not just the what (which ofcourse yields benefits just playing through as you mention) but the how. I tried to help by being an archaeologist of his style, so to speak. Took forever obviously...

There is always the issue of what do I play once done with someone else's solos. That is really the crux of the transcription problem. How do I play something of my own that is approaching that level. If I can't do it, what am I playing that is not at that level? What specific things work and what is murky?