I just gave up at thinking in scales

[Luan]

I'm new to jazz, and more and more I get into understanding how to improvise over changes, the more I realize that I must not think in scales but in intervals (chord tones, chromatics, passing tones).
At least, in this stage.
My problem (and i'm sure it's the same problem of a lot of people) it's that I can't think fast the X position of say, the lydian b7 scale, so rather than trying to improvise using position scales for example, I just think of the chord tones plus the passing notes of that scale of the moment, it's a LOT easier (at least for me) just to think of each note of the scale or whatever.
It's that what a saxophonist would do, right?

[Sailor]

Same here. I'm trying to play over changes using ARPS, passing tones, whatever. I can't get my mind around the right scale for every chord change...don't even want to. It's all variations of Major or minor scales anyway.

I DO like the idea of going from the 3rd to the 7th, which I just recently realized.

Sailor

[zlarmer]

Chord tone soloing > scalar soloing, in my opinion.

Modes and scales have always seemed fairly useless. A good solo appropriately outlines the harmony.

Scales are a good/easy starting point... but now you're moving in the right direction. Ideally, you should just be able to play what you hear in your head. However, more often than not... It's going to be based around arpeggios and passing tones.

The study of arpeggios will greatly improve your ear and grasp on how to play these "sounds" that you hear.

[Luan]

The 3rd from one chord to the 7th of the next chord, etc, right?

[gravitas]

I think that there is a fruitful and neccessary period every jazz guitarist goes through where he/she only thinks in terms of chords. That being said, chords are not neccessarily superior to scales, but they are a utilitarian way to channel this style of music. Eventually, pretty much anything goes.

[franco6719]

Occasonially, I will think of scales (altered dominant, augmented, modal tunes etc) but it's mostly arpeggios and chromatics nowadays. I know what you mean. I want to try and really nail the changes dowm first, then try playing "outside" or totally by ear or whatever.

I was taught the other way around at Berklee, and it was alright, but it always seemed that I was missing something essential in my improvisation. It never quite sounded like I was playing THE TUNE.

[derek]

Arps and triads with extensions for me too. I have just never liked (in jazz) that half step whole step scale sound. It just isn't that interesting to me. What I have found myself doing more these days is adding some of the color tones from scales that I like into my arps. I guess that is a bit of a compromise.

That, and I am really on a mission these days to learn more melodies to tunes and quote them in other songs, or just use them as material for solos. I figure Jerome Kearn does a better job of putting together a melodic line than I do, so why not borrow from him and others?

[The Korux]

I don't think when I improvise.
I just play what sounds good on the given chord and sometimes I use licks I've learned..
Not very academic, but a very natural way of improvising..

But you should practice the progression often and in the beginning there will be some wrong notes.

[mr. beaumont]

i think it comes down to what helps you visualize the fretboard-- for me, a guy who thinks very chordally in the first place, thinking scales isn't usually my method--but it does have it's place too...i'm coming to a comprimise in this, it doesn't have to be all of one or the other to me..so it's whatever helps me think quicker or clearer at the moment. but then again, in the heat of the moment, i don't want to be doing to much thinking anyway...

i'm trying to get myself to the point where i hear a melody in my head and can play it simultaneously on the guitar. i've gotten pretty good at this in single lines, but thinking polyphonically--yikes!

[Goofsus4]

Oh man, Luan....YES! You've got it now, I say.

I also agree with Gravitas - eventually anything goes.

BUT, my own personal journey with this stuff has convinced me that the quickest and most musical way to get to where Gravitas is talking about is to go the "arps plus" route. The "plus" can be chromatics, melodic extensions, etc. - any note that is not a chord tone.

And I also like what Mr. B said too, that your approach is often influenced by how you learn to organize the fretboard. I notice that sometimes I am thinking in a scalar manner when navigating between chord tonal centers or arp patterns, especially if I am getting a bit lost. The scale can take over and give me some low risk options until I recognize where I am again.

I am also a big fan of assigning "home scales" for certain chord types, i.e. my home scale for a dom 7 is mixolydian mode I suppose, i.e. 1,2,3,4,5,6,b7. So a dom7 is THAT to me, plus anything else I want to play over it, but I always know I can play the home scale and get by. I got that concept from a Joe Pass instructional CD I think. So, I guess I really assign various chords an expanded arpeggio. Hmm...

[franco6719]

Of course, the ultimate goal is to master the instrument and master the music well enough so that you can, as some people claim Charlie Parker said: "learn all of that and then forget it and just play."

Definitely, the less you have to actually think about anything (licks, arpeggios, scales), the more natural, instinctive and musical will be your improvisation. For some tunes, I try to play just what I seem to hear or feel inside without thinking, while on others I tend to have to think more carefully about trying out some new lick or arpeggio-style patterns.

[aramis]

I am not a pro but from what I've read and heard I think all this scale-learning is actually a result of the modal-jazz-boom in the 60’s. Also I entertain the sneaking suspicion that books on jazz overemphasize the mode-thing simply because you can easily fill a book by printing out all the scales and their modes in all the keys and different positions of the fretboard.

Unfortunately most of the books don’t tell you that this is actually the arsenal for modal jazz improvisation, a theory that was meant to be an act of emancipation from chordal lead sheets. Today people learn this arsenal of modal jazz (without knowing what it is) and then they try to force their modes and scales over innocent chordal lead sheets. This is real paradox. And it just doesn’t work very well.

Shure, you can find chords inside of the scales. So you can play the scale up and down rapidly, hoping as many chord tones as possible may fall on the strong beats. After all it is a question of probability. You shoot an automatic gun and some bullets may hit the target. Many people play this way, even professionals. But the fastidious ear can hear the lack of orientation.

If you are ready to invest more time to get to know your scale better you can learn to tell the chord-tones from those scale-notes that do not belong to the actual chord. After a while you may be able to „see“ different chords within the scale. In other words, you tediously learn something in the first step (scale), then, in the second step you have to substract parts from it to get the desired result: The chord tones that are hidden inside of the scale. It may work but it is real intricate if you ask me. Why this long way round? Why not learn the arps themselves?

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think modes are useless. Go into scale improvisation and modal playing in case you want to sound like the later Miles or Coltrane. Fusion also requires modes. Al DiMeola or McLaughlin: Scales only. But if you prefer to sound like the bop-players I would recommend you to go the arps-road rather than the scale-road. (Far as I know the inventors of bebop didn’t even know the „bebop scale“).

[Luan]

I'm having a lot of progress lately. I can see in each scale which note I don't want to play (or those that you must be careful), I can target 3rds and 7ths directly on each chord change, altered tensions, etc.
It rules so much! I'm still playing scales, but paying a lot of attention to the notes that matter, and being conscious of what I should play depending on which chord I am.

[abracadabra]

I've also found the scale approach very frustrating, but changing my thinking system into 'cells' has really helped alot. Now I find it much easier to hit the chord tones on downbeats and emphasize the 3rds and 7ths.

[fast1]

I've also found the scale approach very frustrating, but changing my thinking system into 'cells' has really helped alot. Now I find it much easier to hit the chord tones on downbeats and emphasize the 3rds and 7ths.

"cells"? i don't get you

[FatJeff]

Also I entertain the sneaking suspicion that books on jazz overemphasize the mode-thing simply because you can easily fill a book by printing out all the scales and their modes in all the keys and different positions of the fretboard.

Unfortunately most of the books don’t tell you that this is actually the arsenal for modal jazz improvisation, a theory that was meant to be an act of emancipation from chordal lead sheets. Today people learn this arsenal of modal jazz (without knowing what it is) and then they try to force their modes and scales over innocent chordal lead sheets. This is real paradox. And it just doesn’t work very well.

Ding ding ding!!!! We have a winner, folks! Brilliant!

[gravitas]

Ding ding ding!!!! We have a winner, folks! Brilliant!

Yeah, I agree 100%

[abracadabra]

quote: "Cells"? i don't get you

I think its covered in a few different books. I have the one by Mike Steinel. Basically the idea is that the jazz 'vocabulary' can be broken down into a small number of constantly-recurring cells, mixed in of course with a whole lot more originality. So if you take just about any jazz solo you will find many examples of a player playing any four consecutive notes of a scale (i.e. a 'cell' or 1-2-3-4), or of an arpeggio (i.e. 1-3-5-7), or moving from one scale tone, up or down two notes, and then back to the original one (i.e. 1-2-3-1). There are many others.

So when you practice scales, or arps, or whatever, you practice them in terms of cells, not just blowing up and down the scale.

As an example, playing over a ii-V measure of Dm7-G7, you could play:
F-E-D-C-B-D-F-G

The F-E-D-C is a 1-2-3-4 of D Dorian, and B-D-F-G is a 1-3-5-7 cell going up a G7 arpeggio. (obviously in this case it is actually 3-5-7-1, but the 'cell' idea just refers to playing consecutive notes in the arp. Just as F-E-D-C is actually b3-2-1-b7, consecutive notes.)

Anyway, there any many such 'cells', but the point is that once you learn the format of each cell, which is pretty easy, you can apply it to any scale or arpeggio. The possibilities for just playing straight 8th notes with no altered tones are huge. So once you combine this idea with altered tones, chromatics, alterations of rhythm and your own 'spices', you have a pretty awesome sounding solo.

I don't think the idea is that lots of jazz greats actually learnt 'cells' but the concept is that all jazz solos contain them, by 'accident' or design. You can use them as a starting point to learn to improvise in the first place.

I guess you could think of it as, instead of learning specific licks, you learn tiny sections of scales, and then splice them all together on the fly.

Anyway, it's really working for me!

[Goofsus4]

Yes, good post aramis.

[derek]

quote: "Cells"? i don't get you

I think its covered in a few different books. I have the one by Mike Steinel. Basically the idea is that the jazz 'vocabulary' can be broken down into a small number of constantly-recurring cells, mixed in of course with a whole lot more originality. So if you take just about any jazz solo you will find many examples of a player playing any four consecutive notes of a scale (i.e. a 'cell' or 1-2-3-4), or of an arpeggio (i.e. 1-3-5-7), or moving from one scale tone, up or down two notes, and then back to the original one (i.e. 1-2-3-1). There are many others.

So when you practice scales, or arps, or whatever, you practice them in terms of cells, not just blowing up and down the scale.

As an example, playing over a ii-V measure of Dm7-G7, you could play:
F-E-D-C-B-D-F-G

The F-E-D-C is a 1-2-3-4 of D Dorian, and B-D-F-G is a 1-3-5-7 cell going up a G7 arpeggio. (obviously in this case it is actually 3-5-7-1, but the 'cell' idea just refers to playing consecutive notes in the arp. Just as F-E-D-C is actually b3-2-1-b7, consecutive notes.)

Anyway, there any many such 'cells', but the point is that once you learn the format of each cell, which is pretty easy, you can apply it to any scale or arpeggio. The possibilities for just playing straight 8th notes with no altered tones are huge. So once you combine this idea with altered tones, chromatics, alterations of rhythm and your own 'spices', you have a pretty awesome sounding solo.

I don't think the idea is that lots of jazz greats actually learnt 'cells' but the concept is that all jazz solos contain them, by 'accident' or design. You can use them as a starting point to learn to improvise in the first place.

I guess you could think of it as, instead of learning specific licks, you learn tiny sections of scales, and then splice them all together on the fly.

Anyway, it's really working for me!

Good explaination. Tony DeCaprio covers this sort of thing in his book on improvisiation. He refers to what he calls "the 4th note principle", that is, while playing these cells or fragments, your 4th note should be pulling you to the next cell or fragment, much like voice leading with chords.

[FatJeff]

As an example, playing over a ii-V measure of Dm7-G7, you could play:
F-E-D-C-B-D-F-G

The F-E-D-C is a 1-2-3-4 of D Dorian, and B-D-F-G is a 1-3-5-7 cell going up a G7 arpeggio.

Hey, that's a good one! It lies particularly well within "shape 7" that Jimmy Bruno teaches. I hope you don't mind but I intend to use this in a slightly altered form.

[randalljazz]

mentioned above:



available here:

http://www.amazon.com/Building-Jazz-...ref=pd_sim_b_4

(negative reviews to be taken with a grain of salt. )

[abracadabra]

Hey, that's a good one! It lies particularly well within "shape 7" that Jimmy Bruno teaches. I hope you don't mind but I intend to use this in a slightly altered form.

No need to ask me! It's not my idea, probably not Mike Steinel's either.

With regards to using voice-leading techniques, I wrote out all the basic cells which end on a tone immediately above or below the 3rd or 7th of the next chord (assuming the chords are moving round the circle of 5ths). Since I'm only using the basic underlying scale over each chord (Dorian, Mixo, Major etc.) it all sounds very 'vanilla' at the moment, but like I said it's only the beginning and once I start looking at, say, the altered scale, I suppose things will really open up.

It's a very good book, and I highly recommend it. Full of great stuff. What I have mentioned above is about 3 pages worth of it!

[FatJeff]

mentioned above:



available here:

http://http://www.amazon.com/Buildin...ref=pd_sim_b_4

(negative reviews to be taken with a grain of salt. )

You have a double http:// there...the site doesn't resolve.

[randalljazz]

You have a double http:// there...the site doesn't resolve.

thnx. fxd. 2nd x this hppnd here.