-
Is it not even in the realm of possibility that one might choose to play other notes than those that occur in the major scale and not be accused of being "cerebral"?
-
06-30-2013 07:34 PM
-
My personal tought about this matter is: before of even try to sound outside you HaVE to play inside in every kind of song you will find no matter of how complex it is. Check this Pat Metheny composition. It is a very complex example of playing inside. If you can play really inside this kind of harmonies you are qualified to play outside and you will find no problems to do this very naturally and with a very good taste. This song I recorded few days ago with my broken arm, no problem, it is only for cheking what I m trying to explane.
-
Here is just another example from few days ago. Also with broken arm... These two are good and difficult examples of the concept I'm trying to illustrate. With all my fisical limitations, I tryied to play extremely inside, that's not a simple task with these harmonies...
-
Very nice playing Emilio! I hope that your arm is healing quickly!
Originally Posted by emiliocantini
-
This is simply one of the most destructive attitudes in music. We need qualifications now to play certain notes together?If you can play really inside this kind of harmonies you are qualified to play outside
-
This is my particular opinion after almost 40 year of music. It is not so descructive as you think. You can play every note you want in the sequence that you like and "...your choices can come from a deep sense of who you are. ” as you like, but if, just if, you want to be confortable to play outsite with no fear to reach a dead end in your solo, is really advisable learn to play inside any complex harmony sequence before to try to go outside.
I repeat, this is my particular opinion, based in 40 years os Jazz listening, studying and finally playing.
-
Originally Posted by JakeAcci
i'm not getting you here Jake. what is the destructive attitude that you are referring to?
(btw - I don't see how playing inside all the time will help a person play outside effectively, taking Emilio's point. seems to me you have to practice what you intend to perform. in other words I believe that if you want to play outside effectively you had better practice that way - hard.)
-
Absolutely. You can play whatever you want as long as you know how to resolve it. Outside playing sounds wrong if it isn't resolved elegantly or if it doesn't make sense as a component in a larger musical statement. Originally Posted by emiliocantini
-
Obviously, human creativity has a fundamental role in providing brilliant solutions to an exit thoward the outside and a return to the inside that makes musical sense to the listener. And you only can do this, if at ANY moment you need, you are able to return to the inside easily.
-
Discussions are tough using this kind of medium. I must disagree strongly with this old adage, and I just want to make clear that any vitriol that might be sensed from what I write is *not* directed at anyone here, especially you AmundLauritzen... Originally Posted by AmundLauritzen
But I do feel that this particular saying is just flat out wrong. Some of the best playing I've ever heard, if analyzed, would reveal phrases that purposely stopped short of their resolution, and it's a beautiful effect. Wayne Shorter comes to mind when I think of this kind of thing.
Maybe the "as long as you know how to resolve it" is better than the more typical, "as long as you resolve it". One should definitely "know how", but ultimately the choice is an aesthetic one.
Sorry - it's just one of my pet peeves - a phrase that I think get's repeated too often without much thought put behind it.
-
Yes, my beef with these discussions is that the following terms are all subjective, different to different listeners:
"Inside"
"Outside"
"Resolve"
I wrote earlier: I don't think "outside" is a tangible thing...as TH was alluding to, isn't "outside" just a word for "more dissonant than I'm used to hearing" or "more dissonant than I can understand" or "sounds bad to me" ?
Nobody seems to want to address that point.
There are somewhat silly value judgements made about "good," "bad," "advanced," etc. It's just different for different people.
-
Resolutions like harmony is made by the sum total of all activity played by a band.
It is a collective interaction to navigate tension and release and not just the sole responsibility of the melodic player.
Rhythm is also a factor in resolution.
Phrases set up expectations but the story need not always have a happy ending. Whether to resolve an idea now or keep the listener in suspense is a creative choice. Good skills are necessary to do either.
Re: "outside"
Outside of what?
I prefer to think in terms of expanding my comprehension of meaningful musical relationships, growing a sense of a vast "inside" with as few constrictive boundaries as possible.
-
Just a little true story on "Outside"
One day, many years ago, in the 80' in Italy, I had a very peculiar fact: were I and my friend, listening to an album by Pat Metheny Offramp and the song James was playing when at a paticular moment during the solo, Pat decided to play a be-bop and "outside" phrase generating a very nice effect for a song harmonically simple as that. Until then, okay, the thing that struck me when Pat played the chromaticism, was the reaction of my friend with the event. We was staring into each other eyes connected with our ears completely into the sound, when I noticed that my friend slightly twisted neck and head to one side (can not remember if the left or right) exactly when Pat played the "outside" phrase and returned to its normal position when the notes went back to sound "inside". Totally unwitting.
My colleague was not and still is not a musician, but had a great taste for music choices.
Moral of the story: the "outside" it messes with our emotions in a way that can reach out our physical body! I never forgot this episode.
-
No, the music happened to produce a physical reaction in this one subject. That does not create a rule or a principle. It says nothing about what is "outside" and what is not, and even if it did, we're still talking about the reaction of one person. It is highly subjective and related to a listener's history and understanding.the "outside" it messes with our emotions in a way that can reach out our physical body!
Last edited by JakeAcci; 07-01-2013 at 03:49 PM.
-
Yes I know that is a simple story that doesnt tell any rule related to outside or inside but the coincidence of facts was so perfectly combined taht I will never forget.
-
It depends on the context too. Wayne has for the most of his career played in groups where the group dynamics allow him to get away with more dissonant playing in general. It's part of the aesthetic. The musicians have to be on the same page, and of course in a context where there is less emphasis on functional harmony, tonal candences and more emphasis of modal progresions, more major and minor chords and less dominants as we hear in more contemporary pieces. Originally Posted by Spirit59
Discussions are tough using this kind of medium. I must disagree strongly with this old adage, and I just want to make clear that any vitriol that might be sensed from what I write is *not* directed at anyone here, especially you AmundLauritzen...
But I do feel that this particular saying is just flat out wrong. Some of the best playing I've ever heard, if analyzed, would reveal phrases that purposely stopped short of their resolution, and it's a beautiful effect. Wayne Shorter comes to mind when I think of this kind of thing.
Maybe the "as long as you know how to resolve it" is better than the more typical, "as long as you resolve it". One should definitely "know how", but ultimately the choice is an aesthetic one.
Sorry - it's just one of my pet peeves - a phrase that I think get's repeated too often without much thought put behind it.
Yes, it is pointless to generalize around this. My statement took for granted that the context is a mainstream jazz/bebop style with functional harmony, movements like you find in American Songbook Standards. I work exclusively with swing and bebop music so I am likely to assume that context in discussion. Of course everything changes when the harmonic language is different. Jazz that is more rhythmically loose and less bound than bebop also helps contribute to allowing dissonance to a greater degree.
-
Originally Posted by JakeAcci
I certainly think its tangible. The most obvious example being side-slipping. Its difficult to be more outside than that without trying really hard.
I guess the question is, is there a universal standard that has to be met to fit the label? Without complicating or over- analyzing things, I think its fair to say that being "intentionally out of key" equates to being "outside", and that's what people meant in general when the term started being used.
But that's insufficient for the 21rst century player, no? So I understand your point. In other words, post-60s players have used creative schemes to sound "other than diatonic" or "outside the mode of the moment" - yet still sound logical and musical. They're not trying to be Ornette, and they're certainly not trying to be Coleman Hawkins. Because many players have done/are doing this, the standards have changed. So, to some degree what was formally thought of as "outside" has become "standard" or "modern" or "hip", while inside playing sounds un-hip, square, simple, corny, old-fashioned etc.
It seems theoretically consistent to me to maintain that playing out of key is, well, playing out of key, or playing outside. In that case, its just a matter of degree. Are we talking about a scale tone that doesn't fit the chord function, or a chord degree or two that are off? These approaches can tickle the ear and sound a little bit spicy. You can stick with it. But if you're off a half step, you sound way off. Its obvious that you need to resolve that one...Last edited by fumblefingers; 07-01-2013 at 11:32 PM.
-
But the kind of device(s) that I was referring to can be and are done within the context of functional tunes - bebop, standards, show tunes. Take a listen to Yesterdays, off of the 7th disc of The Complete Plugged Nickel box set - there's sections throughout all those tunes where they completely suspend the harmony - sometimes for extended periods. And that stuff is just gold. (now things are getting subjective, I know Originally Posted by AmundLauritzen
) All that freedom within form. For me, that paradigm remains fresh because of all that freedom...
-
I was playing outside yesterday. I have got to say I didn't like it at all.
Too humid!
I was glad to get back to some air conditioning...
David
-
I think you've been cloned into Cosmic Gumbo.
-
I like Scofield's playing very much.
I've trnascribed plenty of his solos...he use very inteligent outside notes...;-)
This is a great school of playing outside.
Best
Kris
-
Agreed! Too, Michael Brecker had a most natural, fluid and lyrical way of passing outside the written changes and gracefully hitting the window back in. Originally Posted by kris
David
-
Personally, I think really being able to hear inside notes is the way to start, then eventually add other notes you like as your ears develop.If you can play really inside this kind of harmonies you are qualified to play outside?
-
What about what could be called a bitonal approach: you're playing "inside" to chords different that what is backing you. Then it's not so much stretching one harmonic structure and layering. (But I think it still makes sense to usually start and finish inside.) Originally Posted by GuyBoden
-
some personal thoughts...
The use of outside can either be within a context, that being an organized musical system, or not within that system. It can be organized or by chance... but there are no grey areas. The relationship is within or not.
I not talking about anything... I'm talking about musical context, jazz. Basically the dissonance, consonance, the tonal atonal etc... are all perceptional audible observations, auditory reactions. You can get into the sonance, amplitude fluctuations and range approach... but they still have organizational guidelines.
Outside music is when ...harmonic, melodic, rhythmic etc... whatever aspect of the music moves beyond or has no relationship within the designed or implied musical organizational system within a context.
If your musical system is designed within traditional Maj/Min functional harmonic guidelines or references... and the music your playing implies those guidelines. Outside would be creating relationships that move beyond the boundaries relating to those associations.
As mentioned above... Intelligent outside notes are usually organizationally derived, at least the relationship. They're within or are derived from within that harmonic or tonal system. They may have more layers of relationships and their development. Usually more difficult to use.
There are always exceptions...
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions