-
Careful Jeff....
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
You may be teetering dangerously close to needing an intervention....
Check for symptoms - do you find yourself worshiping at the alter of CST?
After years of digging his music and approach, do you find yourself feeling like Jimmy Raney is a clod?
More and more, are you finding that you need CST to come up with a decent melody?
We're here to help Jeff....and help is but a chord-tone away....
-
07-21-2013 02:21 PM
-
Yes, it's crap. Learn your chords and scales then do what sounds good to you.
-
Guys ...(sigh).... Spirit - I do read your posts. Thank you for acknowledging that somehow musicians like Bach, Benjamin Britten, Frank Martin, Villalobos, Mozart, - all managed incredibly to produce enduring masterpieces of music without CST. (Gasps from the crowd.) I was annoyed with Jake frankly, first for suggesting that to express an opinion on this thread was somehow a crime, and second for insisting that I apparently do not understand the concept of modes, given that I don't feel they are necessary to create music (oddly enough, the late Joe Pass and Jim Raney would agree with my opinion). If you think I'm making those statements up, try rereading the thread and PLEASE listen to Raney's comments.
Jake - what can I say? Here is a quote from you - "Targuit, I'm not an advocate or opponent of "using" CST, but I do advocate that anybody who wants to engage in a discussion about it ("it" being anything at all) should probably know what "it" is. It seems like part of what you're saying is that since you never learned it or were able to understand it, it must not be useful." Your words, not mine, Jake. And I don't believe I insulted you along the way. How would you fellas characterize Jake's commentary? And who is creating a straw dog and drawing unwarranted conclusions?
I hope you found the link to John Stowell's video a positive "contribution" to the discussion. I wish you the best in your pursuits musically, and as a physician, I wish you a speedy recovery if you have surgery for your ulnar nerve impingement. (Hopefully, I have the right Jake here.)
As far as understanding CST, correct me if I am wrong, but if you play the white keys on the piano as scales starting on the C, you create the modes. Viola. The trick seems to be to learn to play these simple scales in every key and position on the fret board, as well as understand which scale applies over which interval or chord character (dominant 7th, diminished, etc). I don't do this because I play by ear as well as read notation fluently. I'm not suggesting CST is not a valid tool. But I think it presumptuous for one to insist that players who does not adopt it (like Jim Raney and Joe Pass) are ignorant. If anyone wishes to devote time to that endeavor, more power to you. God speed.
Randall - My apologies for mangling Shakespeare - it was late and I didn't feel like researching the proper quote.
Jeff - as regards your well intentioned comment. "Anybody who actually plays jazz knows there's situations where thinking about chord scales makes more sense, and situations where thinking about arpeggios and chromatics makes more sense." Careful, Jeff. Words seem to be parsed with precision here. I am someone who "actually plays jazz" as well as the Chaconne, Nocturnal, Villalobos...and not to mention country rock when my time is not consumed with the thankless task of being a physician. I assume that the situations to which you are referring would be post Miles Davis modal music or trying to figure out what John Stowell is doing.
(That is just joking!) I don't disagree. I guess I just use whatever twelve tones over the chord root works in that situation.
I am not interested in a pissing contest. And I do like the exchange of opinions. Sorry if not liking Allan Holdsworth's music is some kind of offense. I am more of the Joe Pass, Martin Taylor school. Louis Stewart. Jim Raney. Birelli Lagrene. And honestly I don't enjoy listening for long to John Stowell, though I think he is pretty brilliant on the instrument. I hope individual tastes and preferences are still tolerated.
-
I should have said "jazz today, in past and current styles."
But you are still manufacturing an arguement. ..I've never heard anybody who actually knows what they were talking about say Jimmy Raney (my all time favorite, btw) or Joe Pass were lacking anything...and all ignorant means is "not knowing." That's a word folks have to be careful with though, as it has such negative connotatations...but most all of your jazz greats who came up before 1959 or so were ignorant of CST, and only a handful moved on with the direction some jazzers took...I mean, you never heard Joe Pass play "Nefertiti" right?
But that doesn't mean Joe sucks because he didn't...but it also doesn't invalidate what came after. Oyherwise we'd all just play Catfish Strut and call it a night.
by the way, CST is not just about the major scale modes.Last edited by mr. beaumont; 07-21-2013 at 07:21 PM.
-
Jeff, did you listen to the clip of Jim Raney posted by Randall? Please take a moment to hear Jim's response to a question from the audience. I'm not trying to win an argument. Jim makes the point for me, as does Joe Pass in his videos. Simply that CST is a post Davis phenomenon which may help some players searching for different approaches. But not everyone, including Stan Getz and Jim Raney (refer to the video), were advocates of CST. All I suggested is that CST is not necessary for creating jazz. I agree it might be a tool useful to some, but I don't feel a compelling need to devote an inordinate amount of my time to studying it as a discipline. That is all I said. And I dared to express an opinion regarding my personal preferences for some guitarists over others.
I learned scales as a kid playing classical guitar. I learned modes as well. But I don't find a compelling need to base my playing on modes, even when playing post M. Davis stuff. I just don't. Sorry. Culpa mea. If it helps you, fine.
Why is this point sticking in everyone's craw?
-
Well, see that's the thing...nobody (again, who actually plays and knows)ever said you have to think a certain way.
But if I see four bars of a susb9 chord, it's easier for me to think "phrygian" while I'm shedding. It's just an organization method...there's no dichotomy.
-
OK. My approach is to listen to the music and base my note choices on what I hear or wish to hear. That simple. I would add that over any root of a chord there are already implied in the chord at least three and often four or more notes out of twelve potential choices. Leaving eight or fewer notes to use or not to use according to what you want to play. I can see that applying a schemata might help some to reinforce their choices or broaden their horizons, mine included. But if I want to hear a sharp ninth, a thirteenth, a flat fifth, I hear it and play it intuitively.
I also admit a bias to a theme and development orientation to soloing or simply melodic development. My bias. Not a prescription for anyone else. Olivier Messien, the great French composer, utilized birdsong and had an affinity for using series based upon numbers. Ciascun' ha son gout. *umlaouts omitted.
-
None of what you say contradicts CST, and CST contradicts none of what you say.
Again, it's a method of organization, not a prescription of what to play. Anybody who tells u ou differently doesn't know what they are talking about.
-
targuit,
It's so easy to initially get off on the wrong foot on an internet forum. I'd wager that there is a whole lot of stuff that we both agree on / like etc..
For example:
I would go so far as to posit that improvising on a high level isn't occurring unless melodic / motivic / thematic development is happening at least to some extent. Originally Posted by targuit
You may be asking yourself at this point: "How's Spirit59 going to shoe-horn CST into this?"
Well who am I to disappoint?
I think that having various note pools available facilitate motivic development. Sometimes the same notes organized differently influence our note choice.
Let's revisit Jeff's scenario:
If those 4 bars are Esusb9, a little study of E Phrygian yields a triad pair of F and G major. This perspective, though comprised of 6 of the 7 notes of the scale, really facilitates thinking in terms of 3rds....maybe just diads...all the triads extracted from the scale may be employed... Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
You want to comp using quartal harmony over those 4 bars? Sure seems like one would find some utility in being familiar with the associated chord scale, yes? Unless you wanna go with parallel / constant structures, which is it's own thing...
Though the ear is always the final arbiter, I will shamelessly admit to exploiting the guitars geometry by utilizing the various pentatonics when developing motifs - the visual aspect cannot be denied. As long as the sounds are internalized, I don't see a problem.
Anyway, I hope you can dig....
-
Cool. I resolve to investigate further to learn more and be open to possibilities entailed in CST.
I have to admit that I have a harder time thinking about note choices for measures of Esusb9 out of context. Yet actually playing the chord leads to me to similar note choices in an intuitive manner. Nonetheless, I can see the potential advantage to a systematic approach in some circumstances. Perhaps my problem with thinking in those terms is that with all my 'theoretical knowledge', in the moment of actually playing I tend to rely on my intuitive 'subconscious' ear to find the way. That does not negate the value of theory, as all that is subsumed in my musical past.
I once was at a clinic with Robben Ford back in the early Ninties, attended overwhelmingly of course by male guitar aficionados like myself. Robben played some of his tunes over his backing tracks - quite brilliantly - and then took questions. I took the occasion to ask him about what he is thinking about as he improvises in the moment - did he mentally scat his solo? His response was essentially, no, he preferred to 'ride the emotional wave of the music', which I understood as I can use both approaches but tend toward his choice. I think an analogy would be the manner in which a skilled surfer makes subconscious decisions regarding his posture, foot position, shifting his or her weight on the board as one adjusts to the wave. In a sense playing a solo over changes is a bit like that for me. Even when playing solo CM type guitar I find myself the player also being in a sense a listener with this active/passive dynamic going on subconsciously. Choices are of course being made but I like to almost meditate, eyes closed, as the music unfolds in the flow. I'm aware of where I am harmonically at all times, but I'm adjusting to the musical wave in the flow on a subconscious level. I think of it as the Zen aspect of playing an instrument - learning to trust my subconscious to 'take the wheel'. It's not random. My best breakthrough in music was learning to let go and be the vessel. Of course I'm referring to improvisation and not sight reading a part, though there is still some relevance even there.
As a curious aside, before I actually asked him that question, I complimented him on his work over the years and his playing with Miles Davis, as I had seen some recorded video on PBS of him performing with Davis. Oddly, in public before this group, Robben said Thanks, but denied ever playing with Miles (!), which was a bit unsettling for me. Fortunately, after his response to my question another observer boldly remarked that he, too, had seen that video.
Forgive me for taking a detour on the thread, but I thought some might find that true life Robben Ford vignette as interesting as I did. It does help in some ways to explain the way in which those of us who play by ear 'think". Or at least how I do.
-
I can say that for me personally, this is the ultimate goal in improvisation. Originally Posted by targuit
How odd... Originally Posted by targuit
I attended one of his clinics years ago and asked him to talk about his time playing with Miles. He seemed happy to talk about it (he recounted his much told story of lying in the backseat of a car, terrified, on the way to the audition), as most of the previous questions asked of him were rather...er..not stuff that he wanted to talk about.
I've never told this story but...I was told something by a former manager of mine, from when I worked at a guitar shop. Before I had worked there, Robben had done a clinic, which I did not attend. My manager told me that he was at one point asked who his favorite guitar player was and according to my former manager, who was there, he said, "Me."
I asked him if there was any implied humor and he said no, he seemed quite serious, and rather arrogant.
I've never known quite what to think about that....
I suppose one could be one's favorite guitarist, as you only play things you want to hear, right? So maybe in that regard....but still....
-
Can't see any arrogance here. Don't ask silly and you won't be disappointed with the answer!. Robin Ford And Sco must sick of answering that same thread bare question "What's it like playing With "Miles"....
-
Interesting story, Spirit. During that clinic (makes me laugh when I think of a Joe Pass video where he mentions the word "clinic" and then laughs to himself, saying "makes it seem like I'm a doctor or something...." in his classic way) Robben seemed quite affable and generally patient with the questions. At the conclusion he was autographing copies of his latest CD, Tiger Walk, released in 1997. (I have to revise my dates - I said early it was early Nineties - but it had to be just after the CD release.) I was in a relatively sound proof room, playing an acoustic guitar, waiting for the crowd to thin. Then I did buy his CD and he signed it with a black marker pen. As he handed it back, he kind of gave me a hard stare. Out of deference to his situation likely repeated over and over, I simply thanked him and left. I imagine it's not easy earning a living in music, even if you have the stature of a Robben Ford. You do have to have the guts to put yourself up before the public. One aspect of performance that I never really enjoyed when playing solo. Not as bad in a group.
Sorry if I detoured the thread. Now back to the regular program...Last edited by targuit; 07-22-2013 at 09:54 AM.
-
Been following this thread a couple good posts, but there is a new article on Jazz Advice that my gut is telling me to post. Hope others find it interesting/relative to thread.
Creative Thinking in Life, Music, Jazz, Art, and Learning | jazzadvice.com
-
I'm reading Taleb's new book, "Antifragile." Good stuff. Enjoyed "Black Swans" too. Taleb cites Daniel Kahneman often, and Kahneman's most recent book, "Thinking: Fast and Slow" is good stuff. Originally Posted by docbop
-
Thanks, I have to check those out. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
-
Hey Jakeguitar... What do think? Have any idea what the real crap is yet, not the BS, what reference to approach improve with... Personally I would just get your musicianship together.
Without being able to really play, it won't make any difference how you approach improve...
Reg
-
Whew...some fresh air.....what's that funny smell that's been lingering around.
[I just knew I shouldn't click on this topic.]
I'm currently reading Jean-Michel Pilc's book...."It's About Music".....and it is.
Highly recommended.
Wonderful pianist, great teacher.
-
Excellent book and pianist definitely recommended! Originally Posted by Moonray
-
The article's reference to Taleb and his book "Black Swans" was rather unclear. It never explicitly states that he fabricated a character (so I take it this is supposed to be a non-fiction work?) but it appears that people are taking him to task for exactly that....so what is this guy's alleged crime? Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
-
Hey Doc,
Cool read from jazzadvice, and they didn't hit me up for $.
-
Well, I hope the waters have settled and the animae are more at peace. This post is related to the Jazzadvice references.
I was looking at several of the columns referring to improving improvisational skills, use of the melodic minor scales over various chord types, etc. It got me thinking about how I practice improvisation or simply work on melodic lines over know melodies or blues progressions. I don't wish to derail this thread, just to get Reg's and others input eventually on a thread I want to start that just examines how each of us approaches practicing improv skills. And hopefully no will diss each other's opinions or ideas.
I was working on an advice segment on Jazzadvice relating to use of melodic minor. I learned all the diatonic major and minor scales as a kid taking classical lessons, but I was never formally schooled as to "use this scale over the V7 chord" for melodic or harmonic ideas. As I was messing with the scale outlined starting on the fourth interval from the C root or F note, it was suggested that this Lydian scale (if I recall) worked nicely over V dominant 7ths. But as I played through the scale as written in the notation, I noticed that, as I descended down that the highest note as written that one note really didn't sound right and that in a real life example I would have played that note as a flat rather than a natural.
And it occurred to me that perhaps one of the problems I have is this - it is hard to play notes and intervals that you don't hear as 'beautiful' or tuneful or right, whatever term you prefer. As a classically trained player, I am grounded in what I would call classic 'functional' harmony. If I am using that term incorrectly, feel free to give me another label, but I'm sure you know what I mean. The harmony of Dowland, Bach, et al. through the early twentieth century. I certainly played twentieth century pieces by composers like Britten and Martin who used "dissonance", so it's not that I find dissonance objectionable.
By by teens I was playing blues, rock, and country - all of which tend to use functional harmony. In my late teens and beyond I gradually become more involved with fusion and then exploring all aspects of jazz, though I never warmed up to 'avant-garde' pianists and other players. I freely admit that I never felt the same eagerness to transcribe Coltrane or Parker as I did to learn Joe Pass tunes or George Benson or Wes Montgomery (Riverside recordings).
Over the past several years I have transcribed and learned tunes in the Great American Songbook tradition - Jerome Kern, Harold Arlen, Jimmy Van Heusen, Hoagy Carmichael - whose music really doesn't venture much beyond traditional harmony. I really love those songs and find them compositionally quite beautiful.
Where I meet my own inner resistance is when we stray beyond that territory, whether it is the more avant edges of Bebop or whatever you want to term the modal post Miles Davis musical genre. One could say it's about venturing outside one's comfort zone, but really it is about my ears and what sounds 'beautiful' to me.
In the end I feel I can pretty much play anything I can hear in my mind and as I like to say in my heart, dissonance included without a problem. But when asked to play certain types of lines or to listen to certain types of music, my ears reject it as 'not beautiful'. And I think that is my major resistance point. Of course, I don't expect the earth to spin off its axis if I never master that domain. But it is hard to hear and play something that doesn't sound good to you. Know what I mean?
I hope this post is seen as an extension from the current comments about the Jazzadvice site and not a derailment. I'll cease and desist here and start a new thread about practicing improv and hope to see some feedback.
-
Hey targuit,
I play music that doesn't sound really good to my ears all the time... But I'm aware of what ever that sound is and how to create it...musically. I can hear the music as well as understand how it works, even when I don't really like or agree with it harmonically.
It's just music. I eat different styles of food all the time also....I don't call it crap just because I don't understand how it was prepared.
Personally most of the arguments seem to develop from lack of understanding of what we're debating about...
I generally don't like sites like jazzadvice, they tend to throw anything and everything into the mix, without enough organizational oversite.... then ask for $, but at least there putting something out and they help more than they hurt, I hope.
Doc's reference article is always a great reminder. I personally always try and have check points to help keep me on track...my track. So when I make dumb comments I'm aware of what I'm saying.
reg
-
A person who knows what they want to say and has connected with their instrument enough to express themselves can bypass many methodologies. The rest of us need to explore the landscape and there are many approaches to doing so.
Methods that draw directly from the literature itself and the act of making music itself tend to sound like music quicker than those of a more analytic mechanical nature which can sound more like an exercise in the beginning.
This is equally true for for scale and chord tone approaches.
The beauty of some of these approaches is that they can carry us into territory beyond our initial hearing range.
One perspective on scales is that they are a linear presentation of chord extensions.
This is my viewpoint and why I don't understand when people talk about chord tones and scales as unrelated.
That was an excellent point about all the notes within a mode not having equal weight. I would take that one step further and say that all the primary 7th chord notes also have unequal weight within the harmony.
Learning chord scale relationships can be a bit like studying the dictionary.
Not every word will immediately if ever enter your vocabulary.
We all have the sounds that we immediately gravitate towards but we will need a sufficient harmonic vocabulary to address whatever musical situation that we may encounter. That of course varies from person to person. It is the failure to acknowledge this which accounts for some of the talking past each other that happens around here and elsewhere.
-
Thanks, Reg and Bako. Appreciate the comments. I was checking out the site because I'm determined to become better educated about CST and learn what applications might be useful to me. But I'm so used to my ear determining what I play (informed by my theoretical knowledge) that some things just don't 'sound right' to me. And I think it's a resistance point for me to overcome or deal with, as my ear has always been the final arbiter of what I play in the moment.
Reg - Hope your latest gig went well and somewhere along the line you regale us with a couple of stories. Maybe I'll start another thread under Everything Else about close encounters with musical 'royalty'. It's kind of fun to hear these things, and I've happened to meet a few along the way.
Bako - thanks for the sound and reasoned responses. I think your points about chord tones, extensions and scales are right on. Still I find it hard to decipher the playing of John Stowell, for example. I think he is quite extraordinary in his "mindfulness" of what he is playing in the moment, yet I just don't really like to listen for long by comparison with say, Martin Taylor. Could be my ears are just "old fashioned". I think it's more about my individual taste than anything else.
Reply With Quote
Tour of Gibson Custom Shop
Today, 06:04 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos