struggling with integrating melodic minor into diatonic scale shapes

[55bar]

Hey 55... just making sure you know when I said enough BS... it was about me writing to much BS, had nothing to do with you, when I reread etc...

The all relationships with all possible targets.... is just the mechanical numbers game...


The D-7 G7 Cmaj7 progression.

The 1st set of targets would be the actual chords, D-7 G7 Cmaj7 , each chord can be a target, or D-7 G7 as one target and Cma7 as another etc...

The relationships are how and what I use to create relationships with any of those targets... relationships are subs, any related chords, diatonic or expanded diatonic relationships, modal relationships.. anything you use to expand the basic chord.

I always try and be aware of a basic analysis.... Dominant to Tonic... subdominant dominant tonic, subdominant tonic...

And then you move on the the 2nd level of targets... all the 1st set of relationships can become new targets.... example being sub of a sub.

Personally the better organized your understanding becomes of what you play...which eventually becomes instinctive... anyway... there are a few benefits,
... you develop a better feel for what works best in different settings... the 1st time you perform.
... really helps create better harmonic grooves... the spatial balance of your harmonic playing.
... you can hear what other players are playing etc...
... you can hear whats going on

All cool,

So basically you think about approaching any of the 3 chords by their dominant or b5sub?

[matt.guitarteacher]

So the best approach... is to take the time to actually write out all the possible relationships with all the possible targets.
It's pretty simple... I did it as a kid, hasn't changes. there are some new harmonic materials that have added to...

I'll glady help... once you go through this mechanical process...

So, you mean, for each chord:
*extended diatonic analogs
* dominant approaches to each
*bV sub approaches to each
*modal interchange applied to all approach chords

what else? Is that a start?

Might be cool to work through a simple one or two chord illustration with possibilities charted out. You could assign it like homework if you like....
:-)

Maybe doing the process yourself is the important part?

[Reg]

Yes that is examples of... The tricky detail is one chord can have different relationships... which if extended, will lead to different results.

55... yes... that would be one set of targets with two types or relationships. The dominant reference can be specific or more in a functional application... dominant generally implies strong movement towards a target.

And the b5sub can have different sources... tritone subs generally invert the tritone and imply dominant7th chords.
G7 becomes Db7. You can also use modal interchange, or even just use tritone sub with relationship to root motion.

D-7 G7 Cma7
D-7 Db7 Cma7... standard tritone sub
D-7 Db-7 Cma7... tritone root sub
D-7 Dbma7 Cma7 root sub.... but also any of the Db chords can have chromatic function or approach function.

Then when you make choices... your implying complete chords, all the notes.

Matts idea is probably good idea... take standard chord patterns, and start... see what you already hear etc... then start to organize and see how they relate.

1) D-7 G7 / E- A- / D- G7 / Cmaj7 simple with lots of blue note possibilities

2) G-7 / Ab7 / G-6 / G-6 /
A-7b5 / D7 / g-7 / A-7b5 D7 / .... "A" section of S. Mendes Groovy Samba

3) Juicy Jucy... A A B A tune of Horace silver

Just to add... we're thinking in terms of access to MM... but in reality MM is standard part of Jazz language, so don't get tunnel vision or ears, at this point, you should be also thinking,

Comping and soloing are the same thing, just different applications of using the notes
Generally comping is from top down
Chord tones and extensions are the same thing... again just how you want to organize them
Spatial organization is about harmony, melody and rhythm etc...

[Vladan]

The way I see this altered V7 issue, and alike, is very simple. It boils down to one sentence. These two:

1. There is pretty good reason for Blues being played in F.
2. That is because C is dominant to F.
3. Horns are in Bb and Eb.

[55bar]

The way I see this altered V7 issue, and alike, is very simple. It boils down to one sentence. These two:

1. There is pretty good reason for Blues being played in F.
2. That is because C is dominant to F.
3. Horns are in Bb and Eb.

Isn't that 3 sentences?

[55bar]

Yes that is examples of... The tricky detail is one chord can have different relationships... which if extended, will lead to different results.

55... yes... that would be one set of targets with two types or relationships. The dominant reference can be specific or more in a functional application... dominant generally implies strong movement towards a target.

And the b5sub can have different sources... tritone subs generally invert the tritone and imply dominant7th chords.
G7 becomes Db7. You can also use modal interchange, or even just use tritone sub with relationship to root motion.

D-7 G7 Cma7
D-7 Db7 Cma7... standard tritone sub
D-7 Db-7 Cma7... tritone root sub
D-7 Dbma7 Cma7 root sub.... but also any of the Db chords can have chromatic function or approach function.

Then when you make choices... your implying complete chords, all the notes.

Matts idea is probably good idea... take standard chord patterns, and start... see what you already hear etc... then start to organize and see how they relate.

1) D-7 G7 / E- A- / D- G7 / Cmaj7 simple with lots of blue note possibilities

2) G-7 / Ab7 / G-6 / G-6 /
A-7b5 / D7 / g-7 / A-7b5 D7 / .... "A" section of S. Mendes Groovy Samba

3) Juicy Jucy... A A B A tune of Horace silver

Just to add... we're thinking in terms of access to MM... but in reality MM is standard part of Jazz language, so don't get tunnel vision or ears, at this point, you should be also thinking,

Comping and soloing are the same thing, just different applications of using the notes
Generally comping is from top down
Chord tones and extensions are the same thing... again just how you want to organize them
Spatial organization is about harmony, melody and rhythm etc...

Reg,

Great stuff, I'm getting all of this, you mentioned that you used to record the melody to a standard then comp to yourself, I'm guessing this is what you did when you were starting out?

I'm guessing you then just gig'd your ass off.

If there was anything you could have done differently when learning this (if anything) what would it be?

Advice to yourself at 18yrs old (musical)
Advice at 30yrs old etc

what do you think was the biggest waste of time, something you spent time on which was just practicing for practicing sake maybe?

[matt.guitarteacher]

D-7 Db-7 Cma7... tritone root sub

Among other things, it's nice to know a term for that...

... take standard chord patterns, and start... see what you already hear etc... then start to organize and see how they relate.

1) D-7 G7 / E- A- / D- G7 / Cmaj7 simple with lots of blue note possibilities

What I hear, personally, is pretty basic at this point. I can hear altered reasonably. I've done a good bit of MM for minor-type chords and a little of V7alt "of the minor chord". I'm starting to be able to relate to those somewhat as well... Nothing systematic. Just what I've been able to piece together from what's talked about here.

So if I'm writing out possibilities, "doing the math", as you say, what does that look like for D-7 for example? I think you're saying that once you look at the options for each separately, you're going to see obvious choices for which ones go together best in sequence?

[55bar]

Among other things, it's nice to know a term for that...



What I hear, personally, is pretty basic at this point. I can hear altered reasonably. I've done a good bit of MM for minor-type chords and a little of V7alt "of the minor chord". I'm starting to be able to relate to those somewhat as well... Nothing systematic. Just what I've been able to piece together from what's talked about here.

So if I'm writing out possibilities, "doing the math", as you say, what does that look like for D-7 for example? I think you're saying that once you look at the options for each separately, you're going to see obvious choices for which ones go together best in sequence?

Hi Matt,

I'm Not AT ALL trying to answer for Reg, but here's what I'm doing or thinking if its of any help. Reg correct me if I'm getting this wrong.

to use your example of D-7 this could be a few different things.
•D-6/9
•D7#9
•D7#11
•D-7b5
•D7sus

Probably even

Dmaj9
Dmaj7 #11

I think it all depends on the groove, where you place it, wether you are the only person comping, the melody note is king too, so if you were playing chord melody arrangements you can basically do ANYTHING. Some will work better than others.


all would imply different things, depending on if you see it as the target or part of a movement to another target.

[Vladan]

Here's how I would think of it, in the key of G:

5 G major pentatonic fingerings
...

Add C and F# to a major pentatonic to get your major scale fingerings

To turn those major scales into harmonic minor, turn every G into G#
...

Would not that be D to D#, if we are in G?

[aleksandar]

That's what you get when you think in shapes. A melodic minor is just a half step difference in major and two half steps in minor.

[55bar]

Can I answer that question? It would be an answer to this topic, also.

Of course please I'm just trying to learn all this so the more points of view the better!

[aleksandar]

Of course please I'm just trying to learn all this so the more points of view the better!

Sorry, I made mistake when quoting you, I thought I was quoting Reg, and we have a shared interest in this topic in a way.

Anyway, to elaborate my approach, while I am here;

The formula for major scale is half steps between the 3rd and 4th, and 7th and 8th degree.
For minor it is half steps between the 2nd and 3rd, and 5th and 6th.

For melodic minor it's a half step between 2nd and 3rd, 7th and 8th.

So, to get a melodic minor, you simply lower the 3rd of a major scale, or you raise the 6th and 7th in a minor scale. If you raise only the 7th, you get a harmonic minor. And then it's practice, practice, practice and so on...

[Vladan]

...

Reg, if you ever decide to quit playing, I think you'd have great "career" counting cards in Vegas, or simillar place. Just keep resisting showing your face!

[55bar]

Sorry, I made mistake when quoting you, I thought I was quoting Reg, and we have a shared interest in this topic in a way.

Anyway, to elaborate my approach, while I am here;

The formula for major scale is half steps between the 3rd and 4th, and 7th and 8th degree.
For minor it is half steps between the 2nd and 3rd, and 5th and 6th.

For melodic minor it's a half step between 2nd and 3rd, 7th and 8th.

So, to get a melodic minor, you simply lower the 3rd of a major scale, or you raise the 6th and 7th in a minor scale. If you raise only the 7th, you get a harmonic minor. And then it's practice, practice, practice and so on...

No worries, just to be clear, I know my MM scales and arps and have used them solely for 10 years or more to improvise, I have a fair bit of vocabulary (always could have more!)

I'm just looking for a different approach to improvising where before it came from MM of the b9 for moving dominants or up a 4th for static dominants. I literally shredded that stuff over and over.

I just want to see chord subs as a way of thinking about soloing rather than "oh it's a G7 alt going to C I'll play Ab MM"

Or "oh it's a static G13 I'll play D MM"

I think if I look at this stuff chorally now it will open up my choices give me new templates and stop me playing the same ideas.

It's like "the chord progression says 2-5-1"

I'm guessing most piano players/ good guitarists don't just look at that and

comp (minor to dominant to major/minor)

The choice has to be made via the melody or the groove, not just play 2-5-1 because that's what the real book says.

(Just where I'm at, could be wrong)

[Vladan]

Isn't that 3 sentences?

Yup. Like in 1, 2, 3!

[aleksandar]

No worries, just to be clear, I know my MM scales and arps and have used them solely for 10 years or more to improvise, I have a fair bit of vocabulary (always could have more!)

I'm just looking for a different approach to improvising where before it came from MM of the b9 for moving dominants or up a 4th for static dominants. I literally shredded that stuff over and over.

I just want to see chord subs as a way of thinking about soloing rather than "oh it's a G7 alt going to C I'll play Ab MM"

Or "oh it's a static G13 I'll play D MM"

I think if I look at this stuff chorally now it will open up my choices give me new templates and stop me playing the same ideas.

It's like "the chord progression says 2-5-1"

I'm guessing most piano players/ good guitarists don't just look at that and

comp (minor to dominant to major/minor)

The choice has to be made via the melody or the groove, not just play 2-5-1 because that's what the real book says.

(Just where I'm at, could be wrong)

Oh well, I was responding to the original post. Me personally, I try to use three main approaches to create tension and release:

- 2-5 ideas
- superimposing chords and scales
- thinking just in terms of chord shapes and then altering them accordingly.

So, for example, the second method, I have a C major chord, and I want to make it sound more tense, I play D major or/and E major sound against it (chord, scale, arpeggio) or A melodic with its triads, and get a Lydian or Lydian augmented sound. Then those could be combined with enclosure embellishments, and then other scales that contain C, D, G, Am, Em, Bm and all of the triads contained in those scales and combinations are endless.

[matt.guitarteacher]

That's what you get when you think in shapes. A melodic minor is just a half step difference in major and two half steps in minor.

I missed the shape post. Maybe you're in the wrong thread? Nothing about shapes that I remember seeing.

[aleksandar]

The title of the thread, and the first post. It is oh so very indicative, don't you think?

[matt.guitarteacher]

Oh well, I was responding to the original post. Me personally, I try to use three main approaches to create tension and release:

- 2-5 ideas
- superimposing chords and scales
- thinking just in terms of chord shapes and then altering them accordingly.

So, for example, the second method, I have a C major chord, and I want to make it sound more tense, I play D major or/and E major sound against it (chord, scale, arpeggio) or A melodic with its triads, and get a Lydian or Lydian augmented sound. Then those could be combined with enclosure embellishments, and then other scales that contain C, D, G, Am, Em, Bm and all of the triads contained in those scales and combinations are endless.

After reading your comments and several threads, now, I'm very suspicious of your intentions in posting anything. You're completely off-topic most the time and derailing threads.

You need to go start a thread on something you want to talk about. The topic of this thread is pretty clear.

[aleksandar]

Hey, suspicious guitar teacher, with that particular post I was answering to 55bar, and with my previous two comments I was answering to the OP, so I think I am pretty much on topic. So, how is the weather at your side of the globe?

[matt.guitarteacher]

Hey, suspicious guitar teacher, with that particular post I was answering to 55bar, and with my previous two comments I was answering to the OP, so I think I am pretty much on topic. So, how is the weather at your side of the globe?

Melodic minor is the topic. So far, I don't think you've touched the actual topic other than giving everyone a theory lesson in the absolutely obvious facts that have to be understood to even talk about it.

[55bar]

You know, I think I'm nearly cooked with this forum, everything seems so get so argumentative. Maybe part of the thread getting off topic was my fault.

If so I'll try and keep to the op in future, as for things getting slightly off I think it's just human nature, I'm sure no one (me included) means no malice, just keen to share ideas.

[aleksandar]

Melodic minor is the topic. So far, I don't think you've touched the actual topic other than giving everyone a theory lesson in the absolutely obvious facts that have to be understood to even talk about it.

OK, so now I have a bit of free time and I am in a good mood to be bored enough to highlight some things for you.


The title says:

struggling with integrating melodic minor into diatonic scale shapes

And then the OP says:

i'm basically trying to get comfortable with using the altered scale over a V7. in G for example, the difficulty for me is how few notes the G major and D altered scales have in common. the b9, #9, #11, and b13 are all non-diatonic. i'm struggling with visualizing what notes on the fretboard are available to me over the current chord in real time.

for me, the layout itself of the [b]altered scale is difficult to visualize/b]. most guitar players are familiar with pentatonic scale shapes -- they are our bread and butter. the major modes and blues scale can very easily be "assimilated" into these scale shapes, and so are easy to learn and cycle through on the fly. the altered scale is difficult for the same reason, that minor third/major seventh combination not occurring anywhere in the major modes. so the fingering is a bit counter-intuitive.


i've been drilling scales over a ii V loop within a single position and progress has been slow. pretty much all i've found so far are a few major 2nds that you can chromatically shift down to get from A dorian to D altered.

So, answering the thread I am saying - forget about the shapes and fingerings, man. They are traps for the creative mind. Think in terms of chord scales consisted of particular set of notes and sounds, not shapes. Think of notes as intervals related to the given chord and the chord that follows, and everything is very much easier to grasp.

So, you didn't say about the weather...

[aleksandar]

You know, I think I'm nearly cooked with this forum, everything seems so get so argumentative. Maybe part of the thread getting off topic was my fault.

If so I'll try and keep to the op in future, as for things getting slightly off I think it's just human nature, I'm sure no one (me included) means no malice, just keen to share ideas.

Nah, it's OK, it is me who is he picking at, because I shook his authority as a teacher

BTW, neither your, nor my post were off topic, because for example, D and E maj triads are contained within the A melodic minor scale. For the most part, alterations are done with the melodic minor, that's why it is called jazz mm. Don Mock has a good book on that. And that book has fingerings and shapes, as some prefer.

[55bar]

Nah, it's OK, it is me who is he picking at, because I shook his authority as a teacher

BTW, neither your, nor my post were off topic, because for example, D and E maj triads are contained within the A melodic minor scale. For the most part, alterations are done with the melodic minor, that's why it is called jazz mm. Don Mock has a good book on that. And that book has fingerings and shapes, as some prefer.

True dat.