-
I was taught to think of the chord i'm playing over and use that scale..i.e. D-7 chrord play D-7 scale... How many here use this method as opposed to modes.. I took lessons for 1 year from a JAzz guy that took lessons from Chuck Wayne a Giant in the Jazz world and this is the way he teaches....
Ken
-
10-12-2007 11:36 AM
-
i definitely think chord tone/arpeggio, for the most part, which gives me the same notes a modal/scale approach would (there's only 12 of those notes anyway, right?). so in a ii V I in C, over the D-7 I'm thinking some sort of D minor arpeggio-- i can include a ninth if i want, whatever.
over the dominant chord, i can have a little more fun. i might think about raising the fifth, which gives a melodic minor sound...i could also play around with a tritone sub, and maybe think along the lines of a Db7b5 arpeggio, or a Db7#9.
there's more to this too. i can superimpose an arpeggio over a chord, for example, i can play a G major 7 arpeggio over a Cmajor and get that raised 4th "lydian" sound, or i can stick to a more straight up C major sound, with a 6th, 9th, again, whatever i feel like at the moment.
the problem i see a lot of players run into is overintellectualizing the modes. i've actually had a person tell me, "well, over the ii V I in C i'd play a D Dorian over the D minor, and a G mixolydian over the V..."
essentially, knowing the major scale will give you what you need to know about modes-- this way, if i want that lydian sound (which is very hip) i can think of what major scale it comes from (ex, said chord i wish to play lydian over is the IV in what key?) so when others may be hearing C lydian, i'm thinking G major...
hope this is useful instead of more confusing...
-
Thx, i was taught when i was taking lessons by a monster player that took lessons from the famous Checuk Wayne. And never believed in modes, he always thought of the chord and played that scale to associated with it.
Ken
-
I am in the same camp as Mr. B. I find arps/chord tones much more accessable than scales. However, having said that, I am being taught by a monster player who uses scale fragments, 4 note tetra chords strung together to create lines in addition to triads and arps.
I like the idea of thinking in 4 note chunks as we often see chords coming two to the bar, and jazz playing gravitates toward a steady stream of 8th notes. This approach has really kick started my improvisation, which is the weakest link in my playing.
Tony DeCaprio offers online video lessons, and has written a book on this approach. tonydecaprio.com
-
I see chord and scale improve as closely related but I agree with Mr. B that the chord approach is better.
It may be better to ponder the idea of "what to think of" when improvising in terms of melody and harmony instead of chords and scales. I my opinion the melody constitutes the tunes DNA which lives inside the rhythm and harmony of the tune. After all, it is the melody that makes two songs that share the same chord progressions different. The harmony is best captured in the chords (not the scales).
When I improvise I always start with melodic embelishment and fragments and try to slowly morph to outlining the harmony as described by the chord relationships. However, if I sense that the harmony-based improv is overly obscuring the melody I always move back towards the melody and start over with a new fragment. Over time and repetition, the melody necomes internalized and reveals more opportunities for improv.
This comes from my own preference as a listener. if I start hearing the "identity" of tune start to come apart at the seams with flashs of technical gymnastics or over zealous substitutions that can be applied to any tune, I quickly lose interest. In my opinion, the craftsmanship is lost at that point and the tune's DNA has been destroyed.
I guess I'm getting a bit too philosophical; to be more direct, I think the best approach to improv is to think of the the melody and let the ideas evolve from it. Learn as many tunes as you can and keep them short. Listeners (not musicians) would rather hear alot of short tunes that treat the melody with interest than two or three long tunes that display a technical mastery of chords and scales. Besides, the melody fits perfectly in the harmony to start with and its the easiest thing to remember.Last edited by Jazzaluk; 10-15-2007 at 02:39 PM.
-
i don't think you're getting too philosophical at all.
jim hall said something to the effect of , when improvising, my job is to create a melody as good as or even better than the original melody...
that's some food for thought...
-
Yikes! Hard to think I could improve upon the melody lines in Stella or Misty. That is a tall order for sure.
-
I was wondering if anyone in here improvised using chord-formations? I have found it to be my favourite after using a lot of time on scales.
What I do is that I see all the inversions of the chords as they come along. not really arpeggio-patterns, but the actual chord as I would comp it.
This, mixed with chromatics and melodic taste, has kick-started my bebob-guitar lines.
Great, how different approaches can boost your melodies
-
Playing single lines off of chord shapes is arpeggiating that chord. The difference I think, is I have set arp patterns I play like I have set scale patterns or licks. They aren't necessarily intentionally based on chord shapes.
Originally Posted by Chrizzia
I was wondering if anyone in here improvised using chord-formations? I have found it to be my favourite after using a lot of time on scales.
What I do is that I see all the inversions of the chords as they come along. not really arpeggio-patterns, but the actual chord as I would comp it.
This, mixed with chromatics and melodic taste, has kick-started my bebob-guitar lines.
Great, how different approaches can boost your melodies
What you are talkinging about is a more versatile approach I would think. I do this with triads, but not full chords yet. It is a good way, along with target and chromatic notes, to connect different ideas over a progression.
-
Sorry, mr. B, but I can't see what's the problem with this approach... Each mode has its own characteristics... The 6 in Dorian, the b7 in Mixo etc... I tend to think in terms of modes (when using scalar improvisation), so that I can treat each chord individually. Of course, I am aware of the fact that some modes have the same shapes (like the ones you mentioned), but I don't think they're the same scale. I guess it's just a matter of what suits you best. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
well, my point was that if you think D Dorian--G mixolydian--C ionian--over a ii V I in C you're really not treating the chords differently...it's all C major notes over the whole thing and pretty "vanilla," yet i see students struggling to get out ideas like these and really not making an interesting musical statement in the end...
there's a time and place for modal thiking, and believe me, i know 'em and use them occasionally. i was specifically referring to the overintellectualization of a very simple thing (a major ii V I)
-
Would most people here say chord tones are the most important tool to use on an improv? Then you can alternate scales to get different sounds to fill in and give a particular feeling to the chord tones?
Like if you had a ii D-7, you could use a D Aeolian (includes DFAC) with that A#--or D dorian (DFAC) with that B thrown in. And maybe mix and match for chromatic sounding stuff. Is this common for some of you?Last edited by check1; 01-04-2008 at 11:16 AM. Reason: typo
-
I was taught to improv with chord tones recently. I also like the modal approaches too. But I tend to loose my train of thought while trying to solo/improv and revert to scale positions and chromatics. I still have fun.
-
Just chipping into an age old discussion fella's. The seven modes of a maj scale have their own individual identities. d dorian is not c maj. It has the same notes ofcourse, but it has it's own identity. This means home is D, not C. I know that is obvious but if you take that one idea and really get into it, then you start to delineate the changes in more varied ways than just arp or chord tone playing. I would highly recommend you to treat each chord as an individual and call it by it's own name. As you did with arps and chord tones, you'll just see this more and more organically as time goes on.
Lovely discussions here. Mike.
-
i'm not denying that the Dorian mode has it's own sound-- what i'm saying is that no matter how you think of it, playing Dorian-->Mixolydian-->Ionian over a ii V I is BORING! VANILLA! SAFE!
-
Oh, sorry, I misunderstood. I prefer alternative approaches too, but in the context of diatonic scalar playing, this is the way to go, not a C Ionian.
And I'm pretty sure that a fully - equiped player can make an exciting statement even like this.
-
Boring playing is boring. It ain't the tools that make it boring. Modes contain the arp the chord tones etc. Your method always seems to go one step removed eg for c lydian think g for e phrygian think c for etc. It's like saying "the sons are not just like the father, they are the father". What i'm not saying is that chromatics can't be used or altereds or har maj scales or diminished or the celery unit blonde bombshell scale or whatever. But to think d dor g mix and c ionian is all just C is a mistake i have to weed out of students day in day out.
-
actually, no, that's not how i think...if i want a lydian sound, i raise the 4th. to me, that's easier than memorizing a bunch of new positions, and i can get the same results...different strokes for different folks. i am not a fast or flashy player, so for me, it's about creating an interesting melody in my improvisation. it's all about context.
i'm essentially saying the same thing as you-- i have students who come in and want to overthink everything--hence my example of a ii V I...
-
I agree that boring playing is just that, boring no matter what tools you use. Tools aside, knowing what to do with them, like any endeavor, is what is important. Having said that, I have yet to hear someone play D Dorian, G Mixo, C Ionian over ii V I in a way that was anything BUT plain vanilla. It IS all C major. Originally Posted by mike walker
It is going to sound exceptionally diatonic, which is fine, with phrasing, and embellishments such as slides, hammeron/pulloff, etc, can make it very musical, but not spicy enough for my tastes.
I can live off of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, but why would I want to when there is so much more out there? Besides, jazz is about alterations, whether alterations of time, melody, and harmony.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is something I've started realizing lately. When you've improvised for a while and get to a point whereat you're quote unquote "comfortable" with improvising in general,1 you don't really think about what you're doing, do you?
-
Ok mr B i hear ya. Derek like i said, the spice is added to the mode, chromatics etc. If ya don't spice them then you'll get vanilla, agreed. But that is true of anything, arps chord tones on there own can obviously suffer from the same blandness. Seeing each mode for each chord is just the next stepping stone from key centre playing. Thinking Dorian Mixolydian Ionian for II V I is just a great way to see the same notes from a different perspective. You still use arps, you still use chromatics, you still have to be inventive. For me, it is really important to see the dorian as a min scale with a sixth degree. Not as coming from C. It ain't C. It's Dm. Thinking a II V I as all C just blurs the borders around each scale. It is not in itself "overthinking". Playing a different arp for all chords could be considered overthinking for rockers that play from key centres only. It's all in your perspective i feel. All the things you are is a good example. First 5 chords all in Ab. Cool. But each chord has an identity in it's own right aswell as a relationship to the next chord. I think it's important to be able to delineate those changes without having the chords played underneath your line. Use chromatics ofcourse. But try and see each individual sound. Phew! I don't really think any of this anymore when i play. I just play. Thanks for the discussion. It's rockin boys!!
Last edited by mike walker; 01-11-2008 at 05:27 AM.
-
I agree with the Jim Hall quote mentioned above. Your job, ultimately, is to create a melody. Too often we get wrapped up in the technical aspect of how to create that melody (i.e., I must play lydian dominant over a 7#11), which detracts from the music itself. That's not to say these things shouldn't be practiced and assimilated, because we do want to play the right notes, after all. I would say just to remember that whichever way you choose, be it a scale-based or arpeggio-based approach, to remember that the goal we are trying to achieve is not simply to play the right notes, but to play a good melody.
Another important note: How many tunes do you know? Dallas tenor saxophonist Marchel Ivery, who is sadly recently departed, in a conversation with one of my friends a few years ago said you should know at least 200 tunes. Why? Well, try to think of someone you know who really knows 200 tunes who can't play their axe. After all, think of it--when learning a tune, you are essentially learning a melody over a set of chord changes. And that's what we're all trying to create when we improvise!
One way I like to have students begin improvising is by simply playing the melody of the tune itself. Then, gradually I will have them embellish the melody, but everything still relates back to the original melody. You can hear this approach in great old tenor saxophonists like Lester Young and Coleman Hawkins, or old early jazz trumpeters like Louis Armstrong or Bix Beiderbeck (sp?). More recently, Bill Frisell is one of the best examples of this type of playing. And Bill sounds great! So this is a perfectly acceptable (and even preferable) way of improvising.
Another variation on this is to use pieces of the melody, and take them through the changes. Take Stella for instance. Over the ii-V-I to Ebmaj7, the melody starts on F, goes up to G, and then down to Bb. So, up a 2nd and down a 6th. Sounds pretty cool, right? So start with that, and use that intervallic pattern and take it through the changes. You can start it anywhere (you don't have to just play F-G-Bb), as long as you use the pattern up-a-2nd-down-a-6th. It's tough at first, but you'll notice that your playing takes on a new character, because you are playing things that relate to the melody and are melodic in and of themselves.
So to me, melody is the key. I used to obsess over wrong notes and all that, and to be sure, I have put in (and still put in) plenty of time trying to work out the kinks in my harmonic vocabulary and trying new things. But as Mark Twain said: "I never let my schooling get in the way of my education."
-
Melody is paramount. But knowing your instrument from as many angles as poss is, for me, a great support for playing melodies with freedom. Understanding intervals modes arps etc all over the neck just frees you up. It is not a substitute for melodic playing. It is not a prescription for "vanilla" playing. For me, these things are bridges to freedom. Jim hall knows these sounds every which way. I have known many players that new lots of tunes that could not play the changes. The tune of stella is almost a Bb scale right thru. But the changes move like a snake around that scale. I don't know any great player who can not make the subtleties of those changes.
-
I agree. That's why I stated that we should practice our scales, arpeggios, and the like.
The problem arises when we think of the scales and arpeggios as the "what." In reality, and like you said, they are the "how." Playing melodies should be the end goal that we seek.
My main point, like I stated earlier, is to remember that the things we practice--arpeggios, melodic minor, etc.--are simply a means by which we should play melodies.
And when I say "know 200 tunes," I mean REALLY know them. I'm talking, be able to play them in any key...be able to play the melody by itself and make it speak...be able to play the chord changes with fluidity...and then practice these arpeggios, scales, and the like within the context of the tune. It's a lot of work, sure. But, I haven't met anybody who has done that kind of homework who couldn't play their axe. Of course, I haven't met everybody yet! I'm sure there are exceptions, like you said. The point is, when you practice this stuff, to remember that the end goal is to create music. Just because dorian fits over minor chords with natural 6's doesn't make it "right." That's up to the player to do.
-TimG
-
I see. I thought you meant literally just the tunes!!
The dorian thing is just a beginning. It's in the understanding. Then it's as you
say, "in the doing". Nobody wants to hear a bunch of scales run up and down.
All agreed i think!! Mike.
Reply With Quote
Looking for a "jazz box"
Today, 09:57 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos