How you think: Relative to 1 or the chord of the moment?

**Tony_C** · 10-27-2014, 05:50 PM

Apologies if this should be under theory.

A friend of mine has shifted his thinking recently. Playing over changes, playing chords and thinking of chord tones, he has been thinking relative to 1 regardless of what the chord of the moment is. Contrasting this would be shifting your thinking for each chord. So in C, he'll think of the D-7 as 2 and the F as 4, instead of as the 1 and b3 of D-7. I believe he was applying this approach to borrowed chords and short modulations as well. Just curious how you all might approach the thought process of this stuff.

Honestly, actually typing this out, I can't help but feel that most people are sticking to thinking in the key when they can. I always found it really difficult to change my whole scale degree map on the guitar every time the chord changed, and it has probably been holding me back for a while.

**princeplanet** · 10-28-2014, 08:27 AM

Not sure if it's related, but I found it useful to always know where the tonic of the key of the moment was when navigating changes. As all my (moveable) positional devices and lines (even chord voicings) need an anchor as reference, then the key root is it for me. Even in the case of, say, random non resolving 2-5's, I find my bearings by my awareness of the key root note, even if I never play it....

**Boston Joe** · 10-28-2014, 08:28 AM

I definitely think more in terms of the chord, because that way I know where all the various chord tones and alterations are. If I'm thinking tonic all the way through a II-V-I, I don't think I'd delineate the chord movement as well, and I certainly don't think I'd make substitutions as easily.

**Reg** · 10-28-2014, 09:35 AM

Yea... I mean there is always a starting reference, in this case, the starting tonal reference as in your example... C and typical chord patterns and progressions with in that tonal reference... but there are always relationships which can be developed with reference to the starting reference "C"... and then all the target references, as in your example... D-, Fma etc... Jazz has standard common practice which used those target references. Part of creating more complex harmonic movement comes from those relationships created from different tonal targets...

The fun part is mixing all the different relationships and ending up with great music.

**mr. beaumont** · 10-28-2014, 10:04 AM

I think of movements, or environments...Very few jazz tunes stay diatonic, and I see no need to overcomplicate things by trying to relate everything to the key signature...the chords themselves give so much information..."key" is another level up after I exhaust what I can garner from the chords themselves...

**princeplanet** · 10-28-2014, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

I think of movements, or environments...Very few jazz tunes stay diatonic, and I see no need to overcomplicate things by trying to relate everything to the key signature...the chords themselves give so much information..."key" is another level up after I exhaust what I can garner from the chords themselves...

Yeah, but often a chord can't be handled in isolation, that's why it helps me to figure the key of the moment, the context, before deciding how to handle it. I'll try to think of a crude example without being near an instrument... OK, let's say CM7 to Eb to FM7 then ? .... how can you be sure how to handle the Eb and FM7 in terms of non chord tones? If it was completed like this: CM7 - Eb - FM7 - BbM7 , then I'd be thinking key of F for the last 2 chords and treat Eb as a"back door" cadence, maybe. Point is, without scanning ahead to see the BbM7, chord I might hit a "b" note against the FM7 which is not the smoothest way to yield to the BbM7.

Mind you, I'm not yet adept at improvising against written chord sheets that I've never seen before, but I always imagined that's how you'd do it, scan ahead, group chords to a temporary key, go to town on the usual tonic vs dominant stuff, then panic/guide tone/bluff/layout against the unexpected unstable "modulating" chords.....

**targuit** · 10-28-2014, 10:55 AM

I'm not sure I get the gist of the discussion. Take a concrete example - Body and Soul - which key signature in my HL Real Little Ultimate Jazz fake book is Db. In this key the first chord is Ebm7 - Bb9 - Ebm7 - Ab7 - Dbmaj7. In terms of the progression, the Ebm7 is the iim7 of the progression from the tonic Db. The Bb9 is the VI9 and the Ab7 the V7.
So the chords themselves are diatonic and their character is determined by their relationship to the tonic, Db. BTW, I play the Bb 9 as the flat 9, but I put it as written in the fake book lead sheet.

When you examine the chords individually, the notes are in relation to the tonic of the chord. But I'm not sure where the confusion lies or what the point is of stating the obvious - that the ninth of the Bb chord is in terms of its relation to the Bb.

Am I misunderstanding the issues here?

Jay

**mr. beaumont** · 10-28-2014, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by princeplanet

Yeah, but often a chord can't be handled in isolation, that's why it helps me to figure the key of the moment, the context, before deciding how to handle it. I'll try to think of a crude example without being near an instrument... OK, let's say CM7 to Eb to FM7 then ? .... how can you be sure how to handle the Eb and FM7 in terms of non chord tones? If it was completed like this: CM7 - Eb - FM7 - BbM7 , then I'd be thinking key of F for the last 2 chords and treat Eb as a"back door" cadence, maybe. Point is, without scanning ahead to see the BbM7, chord I might hit a "b" note against the FM7 which is not the smoothest way to yield to the BbM7.

Mind you, I'm not yet adept at improvising against written chord sheets that I've never seen before, but I always imagined that's how you'd do it, scan ahead, group chords to a temporary key, go to town on the usual tonic vs dominant stuff, then panic/guide tone/bluff/layout against the unexpected unstable "modulating" chords.....

Yeah, sorry...thats what i meant by movements or environments...temporary trips to a key center. Thats very important.

**coolvinny** · 10-28-2014, 01:02 PM

My understanding is that many pros think both ways - i.e., what is the chord change, but also how to 'alter' the notes of the key centre in order to "tonicize" the next chord. Still something I'm working on in the practice room but, for example, if the I chord is moving to the vi or VI chord next, then one might be aware that the b13 of the I chord will pull the ear towards the vi chord (say in C major: the vi is A minor. The V of A minor is E7(b9). The b13 of C is Ab, or enharmonically speaking G# which is the 3rd of E7...). There are such "tonicizing" notes for all the common harmonic movements, to iii, to iv, etc. My teacher very much thinks this way. I think it's just another tool for the toolbox, and I do think it helps at faster tempos and to get a little away from chasing chord tones (though that is also very important).

**mr. beaumont** · 10-28-2014, 01:18 PM

I think it's important to understand what the chord actually is...rather than just what it says on the sheet. That gives a lot of clues on to whether it's functioning in a certain way, or suggesting melodic minor harmony, etc...

**Reg** · 10-28-2014, 08:17 PM

I believe I've posted this before... but there is always enough time to make quick mental analysis... which depending on how much time you have, can have as many levels as you choose. Maybe skip a tune like Body and Soul... not really anything to think about there... Take a look at Kenny Kirkland's "Steepian Faith"... look at the chart first, it's in one of Chuck's books.

Check out...

The Beauty Of All Things
Florian Ross... By Any Means Necessary
Billy Childs... Midland, Dreams, Memory and Desire etc...
Tunes that actually have a more complex harmonic theme going on... Standards... are just that. There's no real thinking needed. They're usually very straight and it your job to make them interesting.

You get good at recognizing tonal references, deceptive or camouflaged, and can hear basic references which would reflect your quick mental analysis. I mean typically there are changes and a melody in some kind of form. It's not that tricky.

But as Prince said... you always know where you going, or at least make a conscious choice. If your in the moment... your
late.

**pingu** · 10-30-2014, 02:58 AM

I think .....
on standard/show type tunes , I think in terms of Key centers and journeys
am I going away from the tonic ? (or temporary key centre)
or back towards the tonic ?

kinda like this .....

I is home
ii is away
(II7 like hovering near home)
iii is kinda like home
III7 is going to vi
IV is away
V7 is deff going home
vi is another place nearby with a minor feel
viib5 is going to III7

I mean the above feelings are not always the case obviously
depending on the tune
but the above shows the kinda way I think/feels

Pingu

Hey Reg that would be a great auto sig

"If your in the moment you're late"

**princeplanet** · 10-30-2014, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by pingu

..

I is home
ii is away
(II7 like hovering near home)
iii is kinda like home
III7 is going to vi
IV is away
V7 is deff going home
vi is another place nearby with a minor feel
viib5 is going to III7

If I were to teach my nephew some single line Jazz concepts without scaring him off (kids these days, all have ADD...), then I'd offer something far simpler.

I is home (so is iii, vi and sometimes IV)

V is away-from-home-but-wanting-to-come-back (so is ii vii and sometimes IV)

Infact just "Tonic vs Anti-Tonic"- pure and simple. If we relate everything to 'I" - I could show him a bunch of devices that decorate 1.3.5.7 for Tonic, and another bunch that decorate 7.2.4.6 for Anti-Tonic. (some again are Ambi-Tonic). This same division works fine for the relative minor, ie the 7 2 6 4 are targets for viim7b5 and III7 , but raise the 5th degree as an embellishing diatonic note against III7.

So with 2 main pitch groups you can handle most tunes in Major, and with one little adjustment, most tunes in Minor.

After a few years he might wanna tweak the concept a little and gradually add in the "refinements"

**Tony_C** · 10-30-2014, 08:25 PM

Some interesting thoughts that I will reply to later. Thanks for all the insightful responses guys.

The short version: I realized I don't think I presented my inquiry well. I wasn't so much talking about harmonic specificity versus harmonic generalization. The idea is more of a mental organizational approach or a way of looking at the fretboard, more than your actual soloing strategy. I suppose in some ways it is like approaching the fretboard from a harmonically general viewpoint, but using that as a means to also play harmonically specific stuff. That is the gist of it, but feel free to read on for more of a dissection.

The long version: In terms of thinking in terms of 1 approach, if you were to play over the II chord (again in C Major), you would (or could) aim for the chord tones. You could be thinking D Dorian, doesn't matter. Instead of the II coming around and D being what you call 1, you'll simply leave it at 2. You know that you are hitting the root of the D-7, that it is the 1 of that chord, and you are aiming for it as the root of D-7. Same thing with b3, 5 and b7. You still target those as the chord tones, but when you are looking at the fretboard, what do you see? Do you grab the note while thinking 1 (of D-7) or 2 (the 2 of C Major, which you know is the 1 of D-7)?

This approach implies you know your chord tones and such. It's a question of your identifiers for the notes on the fretboard. If you just see notes, that is a different story. I see scale degrees most of the time, and can think in notes, but less quickly. In my own experience, being on the II and seeing my scale shape spanning out on the fretboard works great. I could tell you where the 1, 2, b3 etc. is in an instant. Same thing over V. That transition between the two where the scale degrees become jumbled is what screws me up.

I don't actually practice this approach much, my friend started doing so, but I was curious if this was maybe how a lot of players think. I am always curious how other players are literally navigating the fretboard and going about thinking of the notes. On a piano they are spelled out so explicitly, wind instruments you have several fingerings that are always that note. The way you play each individual note is hardwired, just how a chord shape is for us. I feel on guitar getting around and thinking of the notes is more of a challenge.

Hey Reg that would be a great auto sig

"If your in the moment you're late"

That is great. Thinking ahead is key. I don't do it enough.

**pingu** · 10-30-2014, 09:49 PM

The long version: In terms of thinking in terms of 1 approach, if you were to play over the II chord (again in C Major), you would (or could) aim for the chord tones. You could be thinking D Dorian, doesn't matter. Instead of the II coming around and D being what you call 1, you'll simply leave it at 2.

I tried to answer that specific question before , sorry I failed !

Yes if I'm playing a tune in C
and Dminor 7 comes along ...... I'll think this Dminor7 is the ii of C

however if its eg Autumn Leaves and the A minor comes along
I'll think ..... yes this is vi of C but I'll also think of the A minor as a new i tonic minor as well

So for me mainly its the first approach but both approaches do happen
and sometimes I try to keep both approaches in my head at the same time

I find that quite tough , but its great when it 'clicks'

hope that answers the Qu

addendum
If its a modulation I'll just go with it and jump to thinking in the new distant key .....
and then back again
how you get in and out of the new key is another situation where
I'd like to hold both Key 'points of view' in my head at once
but I can't do that .... as yet !

**Reg** · 10-31-2014, 09:05 AM

I find that whatever you practice or perform becomes how you play, or in this example, how you think.

There needs to be some type of organization going on. If you don't have the understandings, then your organization can be your ears and how you've trained them to work. Or if your ears are just the result of what you've exposed them to.

Even if you choose to not label or understand what you hear, (or think), there will be organization, even if your not aware of it.

The results are either good/bad conscious choices or good/bad unconscious choices.

I don't like analogies... but you can't play a D-13 arpeggio unless you've either... trained yourself to be able to play it, or trained yourself to be able to consciously figure it out.

In this example... I'm not talking about slowly taking the time to figure out the notes and fingering. I'm talking about in real time. It needs to either be instinct or your understanding of what that D-13 arpeggio is in a context ... needs to be instinctive.

If I say now play that D-13 with reference to Bb Har. Maj. Do you need to think or could you just play. The D-13 arpeggio would now become a D phrygian b11 arp. these are plug and play applications or games, you don't figure out the details... you apply the relationship. The results of that relationship, in this case referencing Bb Har. Maj. are already figured out... you just plug and play.

You can't play the game unless your know what the game is... or you've trained your instincts to be able to react quick enough to play without understanding. It's not going to just happen magically.

So Tony when I look or see in my head... the fretboard, (on on paper), There are always a number of different organizational concepts going on... So verbally talking about it... maybe like there are five different color coded complete fretboard patterns over laid on the neck at once... I'm using Five patters just for reference, the actual number would reflect the context.

But the point is most notes can have any number of references... with different relationships.

In the D-7 G7 Cmaj example... The D-7 collection of notes... the note F can be 3rd of D dorian, phrygian, any modal, modal interchange version of D-7.... could be the 13th of Ab13 or 3rd of Db9 or any other sub. or chord pattern and on and on.

Again my point... this is in real time. I don't really need to think about these choices and a bunch more because I've already trained my ears and thinking process of understanding to just play these. Plug and play relationships, not just changing one note.

But I can also and do listen for what I haven't trained myself to become instinctive... I have the trained ability to figure out and understand other possibilities... this process or method of thinking about playing what I don't know yet.

Just as I've trained myself to play what I know... I've also trained my self to play what I don't know, making instinctive choices at real time without all the info.

I'm not a neurologist, but info from neurologist friends...these cognitive abilities can improve or decline depending on if you use them.

**targuit** · 10-31-2014, 09:46 AM

Hey, Reg!

You hang with neurologists? That's cool! You know there has been a lot of work recently on improvisation and watching professional musicians improvise while having an MRI to see what areas of the brain "light up" in the process. Pretty amazing stuff, as they have to use specially constructed keyboards that have no metal in them. (Metal is seriously not cool in a magnetic resonance device.) The areas that light up, so to speak, in the act are areas of the cerebral cortex and parts of the brain associated with the dream state and narration. Or as I like to put it, let your subconscious take the wheel and recount your musical dreams.

All this referential stuff, modal interchange et al. - so complicated! It gives me a kind of headache just to read it. As I get older, all I want to do is play what I hear. I find musical thought is so much more concrete and in the moment. Music at the speed of thought is certainly easier. After a while all the theory starts to sound like,well, theory, and that never got anyone but maybe Einstein laid.

I hope I am not yet in a state of cognitive decline, but whom I kidding?

As an aside, have you heard the videos of one of our forum participants, Paul D? Check his stuff out. In my opinion one of the best guitarists I have heard not only on the forum but period. Monster chops. And it's not his day job. Unbelievable. I hope he doesn't mind if I link one of his videos off YT. Gotta go now, though.

Jay

**Reg** · 10-31-2014, 11:22 AM

Hey Jay... yea I remember Tony, great old school player. Totally dig his playing.

yes a few of my friends have much more going on then me, I've been hanging out before and look up and three or four of the people in the room are Nobel laureates. But we play golf, go fly fishing... and yea most of them enjoy Jazz, that's where I fit in I guess, I've taught and can BS the walk.

**targuit** · 10-31-2014, 11:59 AM

Reg, pardon me - I referred to the fellow I'm talking about as "Tony" - stupid error. It is Paul D on the forum. Sorry for the mistake. I must have been thinking of an old friend. I put up a link to his YT videos over on another thread about using 'backing tracks' as an illustration of a fine player who used the tracks just to post his videos, which are very good. What I'm trying to say is that the brilliance of the player can stand out even if the tracks are just a pragmatic background. The guy I'm talking about is a really talented player.

Btw, I could not tell from the tone of your response, but I'm not disparaging your theoretical musings. I'm talking about my limitations - not sure if it's cognitive decline, but I just play from my head and heart. Minus all the theoretical stuff. I've got enough of that in medicine, and I'm getting tired of that game, too. As for Nobel laureates, I don't know any personally. And as of now I suck at golf.

Jay

**Reg** · 10-31-2014, 04:37 PM

Hey Jay... No I didn't know Tony, but checked out his vid... sounds great, obviously old school and very talented.

Everything is in reference to something, Playing from the head and heart... generally that's how it's done... I just have to read and perform to certain levels of performance, defined by the gig.

In the end we just all play...some know and feel two chords, some one hundred chords etc.. I personally know and feel the chords but also know and feel the theoretical stuff, which generally gets in the way for most musicians because they really don't know or understand the theory BS, at least I've fooled my self that I do and it doesn't get in my way.

Just as most guitarist can play C to G, no thinking needed, or at least most are comfortable with the thinking required to play C to D, I'm comfortable playing music with theoretical applications, transposing... in live time etc... I have my limitations, but they're not usually from theoretical BS... and generally they're never from not having enough feeling or heart... I mean come on, that's the easy part. Putting on that struggling expression with contorted body language... you know, real playing.

It's all good, we do what works and if we choose... work on what doesn't or what we want to work.

**edh** · 10-31-2014, 09:11 PM

@Reg, it's not Tony. It's PaulD that Jay is talking about. PaulD is a member here.

**eh6794** · 11-01-2014, 05:03 PM

To me, a Dm in the key of C feels a lot different than in the key of Bb. Why not think differently

**Tony_C** · 11-03-2014, 06:47 PM

eh: That is certainly true. I was referring more to how you literally see the notes on the fretboard, not the soloing approach you use.

So Tony when I look or see in my head... the fretboard, (on on paper), There are always a number of different organizational concepts going on... So verbally talking about it... maybe like there are five different color coded complete fretboard patterns over laid on the neck at once... I'm using Five patters just for reference, the actual number would reflect the context.

That makes a lot of sense reg. More flexible. I can do that to an extent but not too much (hence the thread). I'm glad to hear someone say that is what they are actually doing.

princeplanet: To your first post, I agree. Knowing where the root is makes it a lot easier for me to shift around things I already have under my grip.

pingu: I think you pretty much had it, I just personally needed to reread a few of the other members posts myself. Getting myself confused.

Again, thanks for the assistance all.

**eh6794** · 11-03-2014, 07:09 PM

Oh I see what you mean. I think I still see the fretboard, relative to the key center

**EightString** · 11-03-2014, 08:51 PM

When I'm learning chord changes to a new song, I might consciously think in terms of chords and their relationships. Then I learn heads (melodies) based on vocals. But once the chord changes and basic melodies are ingrained, I never "think" about them again, and when improvising solos, I hear and play the changes without ever consciously thinking "ii-V-I" or anything like that. It's all about playing melodies and structure that I "hear" as working over the music as it is flowing.

Unless I'm figuring out new songs or new elements to add to my playing, I'm always just using my ears.