-
Originally Posted by Jazzaluk
-
02-03-2011 11:45 AM
-
Originally Posted by Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D
Of course, that leave open the question of whether chord-scale theory is the better vehicle. I can play altered-note melodies on a dom-seventh, but if I have to think "melodic minor a half-step above the root" or 'melodic minor on the seventh degree of the Mixolydian mode' at least two beats will go by in the interim.
It seems to me the process of constantly imposing a chord scale on yourself pretty much forecloses the possibility of "forgetting" some of which you want to forget.
BTW, does anyone call you Doctor Boob?Last edited by Aristotle; 02-03-2011 at 12:19 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Jazzaluk
As far as M.I., to me, confusing name for some simple ideas. Instead of playing "Rhythm" as Bb-Gm7, you play Bb-G7. Voila! Has more bite that way.
Embelling chords inculdes things like adding notes that are note in the origical key or changing notes in a chord to ones that are not in the original key. Major for Minor, or add b9 for example, or both Bb to G7b9. Easier on the head to add and changes notes than to futz around with a mouthful like "Modal Interchange."
And then there's the related "borrowed" chords idea. I am not borrowing them, because I have intention of giving them back. Non diatonic chords sound good too.
-
Originally Posted by Reg
-
Originally Posted by Aristotle
I have been using a chord naming convention to write charts for my own solo playing. I tend to think vertically and horizontally a the same time and was looking for a way to refine my methods using some of Reg's experience.
I have been using unique chord names to identify both linear and chord substitution options as a framework for mapping out improvisation options and creating variations from chorus to chorus. I can extract three, sometimes four, chord options from each unique chord name which gives alot of options and freedom when playing chord melodies and lines.
I derived the approach from three sources (Barry Harris, Joe Pass and Bucky Pizzarelli) and it is just my personal way ... It is theory based but also recognizes the geometry of the fretboard, its limits and advantages. Probably would not be well received on this forum, so I won't go into it.
(and no ... I'm not writing a book , I'm just a guy that has enjoyed playing jazz guitar for a three or four decades)
-
Originally Posted by Jazzaluk
I tend to think vertically and horizontally a the same time and was looking for a way to refine my methods using some of Reg's experience.
Horizontal - the scale (its tonic and tonality) of the improviser are imposed on the chord changes.
(Overly) Simple examples: using the one basic blue scale over all three chords; or Hendrix on Hey Joe, blues scale on all five chords.
Vertical - the chords control the tonality the improviser uses
Simple example: CST itself. Playing blues C7 = C Mix, F7 = F Mix
Some people link this to "tonal gravity" - where does it want to resolve (controlled by the chord); or where is it made to resolve (by the players imposed scale).
If that's not it, in a nutshell, I am not sure I want the rest of the nut.Last edited by Aristotle; 02-03-2011 at 02:22 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Aristotle
root .. perfect 5th ... major ninth ... major 13th ... major 3rd ... major seventh ... #11th ... ?
-
Augmented 15
-
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
-
You guys have to be kidding!
I go out on a limb, answer questions about terms and ideas I don't use or think about, and never tried to explain before (modal interchange, horizontal and vertical playing) - and no one can find any place where I missed anything?
-
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
Directly from page 14 of the LCCOTO.
-
Originally Posted by paynow
Seriously, does he have the fifth of F# as Db, and not C#?
-
ZZZzzz
-
Wake up, Mr. Pac!!! The LCCOTO is knocking!!! Just kidding.
-
The Chord Scale approach is a good way to suck less. That is the way I have been taught it. I am surprised more people don't see it this way. It is a good thing to have in your pocket, but it shouldn't be treated as the end all and be all of your playing. After about a year and half of music school I have realized my best improvisations haven't change that significantly, apart from getting better at lifting cool licks and throwing them in solos, and a better understanding and feeling of time. The trick is when I am having a bad day, they tend to suck way less. Mostly thanks to the tools the chord/scale approach. But being taught to play in positions has probably helped this as well. Without a serious mathematical inquiry it is hard to say which has helped more. It is very useful to be able to approach a chart, say like infant eyes, or something, with weirder changes, and at least not suck at blowing over them.
I say the more ways you can put together a solo, the better. Like they say, there is more than one way to extricate the epidermis from a feline quadruped.
-
Originally Posted by sc06yl
-
Originally Posted by sc06yl
It's also funny how you're being taught to play in position, and I'm being told to break that habit of mine (which I picked up with my years playing classical guitar). Different interpretations to be sure!
-
Originally Posted by sc06yl
-
Perhaps suck-less isn't the right way to put it. I think a better phrase would be "become more consistent in your improvisations". Who doesn't like consistency.
For sure, as far as position playing goes, I use to think up/down the neck, and playing in position has giving me a little more continuity, surprisingly (because it was contrary to what I thought would happen) helped me think in larger intervals (when I am playing in 5th position I have three octaves of A's right on the tips of my fingers) helped me learn and think in terms of modes better, and also forced me to become more focused on my left hand technique.
Like I said, there is more than one way to skin a cat. You ask ten teachers, they are likely to give you different opinions. I have given some of their thoughts serious work, like position playing, which I never did before, having no formal training on the guitar, and less to ideas, like ones involving the bebop scales. The CS wasn't the first thing I was taught either, first it was 3rds and 7ths, then neighbour tones, and then, and then...ect. I have a feeling every teacher teaches what they are good at, or what helped them. It would only make sense then that there are, a million ways to approach improvisation.
-
I'm now really curious what these anti-CST players think of and use. I can't imagine playing without knowing the parent scale...
I think like this... big to small...
Key
Scale/Mode
Basic CS tones
Extended CS tones
Chromatic connections
The middle three categories are the main CST focuses. The key and chromatic embellishments are the extreme ends. Keys provide a general overview, and chromaticism without a context is nondescript at best.
None of these views are dispensable, IMHO. I am still surprised at the resistance to CST there is here among guitarists. It seems like they are cutting themselves short of a good harmonic overview.
-
I think a lot of the resistance comes from the fact that playing using CST is difficult. It takes a lot of brainpower. Let's take the first 3 chords of Someday My Prince Will Come, for instance: Fmaj7 - A7#5 - Bb7#11. When making the transition from one chord to the next, if I'm using CST, I have to think "F Ionian, let's see, that's one flat (Bb), and here comes A7#5, so I'll play A mixolydian and sharp the 5th, so that's 3 sharps for the key of A (F#, C#, G#) minus one for the b7th (F#, C# now), plus one for the 5th which makes 3 sharps again (F#, C#, E#), and uh oh, here comes Bb7#11, so that's gonna be - uh, what is it? - let's use a Lydian dominant on Bb, so that's going to be 2 flats for the key of Bb (Bb, Eb) plus another one to make it dominant (Ab), then add in a sharp on the 11th, which makes the Eb an E natural..." This is the kind of thinking that can drive a man nuts when he's trying to improvise.
OR...I can just think overall keys, on the order of several measures, and play more or less diatonically in the key of F, just using my ear to make adjustments for the alterations. Guess which one is easier, at least for the novice?
Don't get me wrong, I am intensely interested in application of CST, it's just that I fail to see how to actually do it in realtime without putting in enormous shedding effort. As someone else mentioned before, CST really shines in non-diatonic tunes like Coltrane, Shorter, Golson, etc. I would like to get there someday, but to date I've not really found a simple method for doing so.
-
SDMPWC changes are F Major, A7b13 Phrygian Dom. (D HM), and Bbmaj7+11 (Lydian)... All that goes in is a C# over the A7 thinking "key", but thinking scale/mode makes you avoid the p4 Bb of F, and the P4 D of A7(alt is an alt, no pun intended), the IV chord Bb is open turf. The next level in is the linear path that connects them logically, and that includes chromatic runs, etc. Not too bad?
-
I play it in Bb actually.
I play Bb Ionain | D P.Dom | Eb Lydian | G P.Dom | C Dorian | G P. Dom. | C Dorian | F Mixo. | and so on.
-
Originally Posted by Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D
As to the parent scale? That's easy. One this side of quarter-tones, the chromatic scale is the parent scale.
-
Originally Posted by sc06yl
Barry Harris / Oliver Nelson - Dom7/Diminished,...
Today, 03:11 PM in Improvisation