-
Yes, of Course, targets as such neat organization or a methodology in which to use them.
And Ed's case, he has developed 10 specific ways of chromatic targeting (enclosure) of both the reduced melody and the guide tones, line construction, rhythmic reduction and rhythmic permutation, largelt contingent on being able to sing the lines away from your instrument.
-
09-10-2016 08:43 AM
-
^^^^
Originally Posted by Groyniad
THIS is the most succinctly profound thing I've read on this Forum, I think ever. It is exactly the truth, and it's exactly the truth in all creative pursuits, i.e., all the Arts. Mastering the "method" is only the beginning....
And yet it is the thing not many of us can discuss properly, because we're not there yet... Still, it is crucial to be reminded of this as often as possible (like, every day?). If (and when) I finally get to that point, I know I will be retrospectively very critical of the advanced players on this Forum who have neglected to pass on all sorts of amassed wisdom that could be really useful (to those of us not in common contact with great players), but for one reason or another, haven't passed it on, or pass it on in coded, veiled, or convoluted language (eg- the way that Pat Martino craps on
).
Nuggets like the quote above that can only come from advanced players are actually quite rare, compared with the thousands of well meaning but incomplete as well as often contradictory advice we intermediates love to dispense among ourselves. (sorry this mini rant went a bit off topic- just wanted to put it out there, as you were....)
-
Yes the fretboard being an open book I feel like I'm actually getting there, even if I have not yet adrived. It takes a lot of work every freaking day more to get more comfortable so that eventually Things become second nature and you don't have to think about it.
I call it becoming one with the workspace . That's the goal. Isn't it?
-
You know, one of the problems with dispensing "pearls of wisdom" is that it is hard to encode music and the experience of "how" we actually play into words. I just wrote a lengthy post to dispense what I consider such a "pearl" but it is somewhat hard to describe in words clearly and there are many "exceptions to the rule".
At a certain point you do what you do intuitively without much actual 'thought'. You just play what you hear. When Reg suggests that I am "not interested in target tones, so why are you here?" (paraphrasing), it missed the point that at a certain stage you don't so much think as listen while you play - either to the other band members or to what you are playing solo. So using "target tones" is either a formal thing or an intuitive thing - a way of "marking the path" to be followed to reach your destination.
I know that Reg disagrees with me, as he claims to 'think about' alternative tonal relationships in the microseconds as the song goes by. I 'react' intuitively to what I hear with other musicians or in my mind. Not saying 'one way is right and the other wrong'. It just is.
My post was about how to determine just where on the fret board to execute your solo melody or comping or your solo chord melody style thing. I did not post it because it is hard to explain in words and there are many 'exceptions the rule' that must be taken into account. I did not delete the post, so I could put it up, but one is chary of risking being misunderstood. I have no problem with playing through the changes - in fact, the changes and the harmony are the key to the whole deal. So I don't use 'target tones' to avoid the changes - more as markers along the path. And that is mostly intuitive certainly in my case.Last edited by targuit; 09-10-2016 at 01:01 PM.
-
This is much more useful on a tune with busy chords that isn't a ballad.
-
Please cite a specific tune as an example, Jeff. Bebop heads?
-
I think people way over complicate this stuff. The vast majority of music is tonal. There are scales. Chords are made from the notes of scales. When playing over changes in a particular key, one mostly chooses notes from that key's scale. Of course, depending on the chord of the moment, one emphasizes certain scale tones over others. In terms of jazz, one has devices to spice things up, e.g. chromaticism (is that a word?). The fact that the theory isn't rocket science doesn't make it easier to master this stuff. Many roads can lead to the same place. But to me it's all in the scales and chords.
I see a lot written in this forum about how the great players don't think in terms of scales. But, whenever I see a clip of some great player or other speaking about their approach, they always talk about scales.
-
Bop tune would be perfect. A parker blues, perhaps? Originally Posted by targuit
-
You make a lot of very good points. Originally Posted by Groyniad
After you've internalized these things you can deal with the music and the moment.
One minor quibble: I myself don't concern myself with the fretboard. I did when I hung around Chuck Wayne in my earliest '20s. I probably do many things 'wrong', but it often comes out somehow, so it's all good. I always have believed that if the idea comes first the technique will invent itself. Maybe I'm wrong.
Regarding learning tunes on the gig, I could not agree more. For one thing, if one is not willing to absorb some public embarrassment one may never learn anything. For another, you can improvise with added dimension playing a tune for the 1st time on a job. It is exciting. Personally, if someone calls a tune I don't know it can be the most exciting, educational part of the evening. In my years many tunes are similar anyway, and it becomes increasingly easier to hear a new tune, publicly or in private.
So, again, good points and I hope this input can help some a little bit...Last edited by fasstrack; 09-14-2016 at 10:16 PM.
-
This is a Bert Ligon example of triad generalization:
I find this one fascinating and beautiful, and I love that the ii chord has almost no chord/scale relationship to the melody. Analyzing it based on scale degree of the chord-of-the-moment isn't the way to look at lines like this. This one is targeting pitches of the tonic triad.
-
Well, to clarify, it's really not possible to master the fretboard. A quick perusal of Mick Goodrick's Voiceleading Almanac or Slonimsky's Thesaurus should clarify that.
There are some guys like Mick or Ben Monder or Bryan Baker or Chris Crocco that are so good that they can play damn near anything you throw at them. But there's ALWAYS something you can throw at someone, a new conception, that makes even the most accomplished player fumble around like an amateur.
I guess the classic example of this is poor Tommy Flanagan on the original cut of "Giant Steps." He was a great musician (his piano trio playing is top tier stuff). And what is Giant Steps, ultimately, but a bunch of ii-V and V-I changes going by? You think that Tommy didn't know his ii-Vs? But it was an entirely new context for him, a great big curveball that his previous practice had not prepared him for. And unfortunately for him, his very understandable and human struggle was preserved for all time.
Or take that George Garzone Chromatic Triad material. It's just freakin' triads. But it's hard, hard stuff, even for professional players.
But in a way, that seems like a relief. The good news is you don't have to be a fretboard computer in order to play the changes.
The bad news is you still must have a certain level of command of the instrument and an understanding of how to put it all together in order to really play the changes. And I rarely see guitar players who have it all together. I see a lot of guys who know a couple tricks, or have things halfbaked, but they don't really have it down.
Ideally, you should be able to voicelead a line through the changes that you would find in most standards, and have that down so automatically that you continue whatever you're playing (a line, a melody, a motif you're developing, whatever) through the changes effortlessly -- regardless of whether its going up, down, pivoting unpredictably.
I've seen some people quote Dizzy saying that he thinks of a rhythm first and adds the notes. That's great, but the corollary to that is you have to have your changes down automatically so that you can focus on adding rhythmic interest. You're playing the changes, yes, but more accurately your musical ideas are flowing through the changes.
It's not too difficult, but it requires thoroughness. You should know how to voicelead. If your line is on the 11th of a iim7 chord, how does it voicelead to get to the V7? First it's a technical and theoretical exercise, but eventually you also begin to hear it. You also have to know your scales and chord tones for this material very well, and have the technical means to execute it all.
The idea of targeting is great, but again, you need to have certain things down before you can worry about that. Same with substitute changes (how are you going to play subs if you can't play the changes in the first place?) and other advanced stuff.
-
Firstly, great thread, particularly for those of us at a crossroad on the great Jazz Highway, i.e., "I can make the changes, now what?"...
People on this forum who are farther on up the road than ourselves can help us decide whether we need to stay on the Highway, or whether we're ready to take our own detour and start exploring. We must decide for ourselves, and the more advanced guys would obviously know this. Having taught other disciplines myself, I know there is a responsibility when dispensing advice to those looking for it. First, make it appropriate if you know the individual's needs, but if you don't, keep it general while suggesting various "detours", making the differentiation clear between the Highway and the various detours.
I didn't mention any names, but seeing as you did, I can say that I find Christian's advice to be routed firmly from the Highway, whereas some of Reg's advice (not all) seems to either be an extension of the highway that's off the map (no one know's how to find it), or a long detour to a strange and wonderful mansion on top of a mountain way over on the dark side...
-
I think a key difference is that I see effortless playing through changes to be a really important goal so (hopefully) that other forms of expression - melody, rhythm, dynamics, phrasing, swing and so on - come to the fore. This is what excites me about jazz.
My actual note choices are probably quite boring when examined in isolation, but I'm interested in the linear side of it.
Other people see harmony more as an end in itself.
I see that, in fact, as road more travelled by.Last edited by christianm77; 09-11-2016 at 05:15 AM.
-
-
i just had a big breakthrough with this targeting malarkey:
if a tune starts on 1 or 2 and you start soloing thinking 1 (or 2) you're very likely already going wrong (if this forward motion/targeting thing is right)
if you want to think 1 at the start you have to START AWAY FROM 1 IN ORDER TO TARGET 1 - in order to move forwards into 1 at the start.
you can either do this by starting early - before the first bar - or you can use the first bit of the first bar to move-forwards-into-1
so - very very often - i've gone wrong (in the past - pre-breakthrough!) right from the very first moment of my solo. i try to start with a given sound - and that's wrong - you have to start AWAY from the sound you're thinking of/hearing - say 1 - IN ORDER TO GET TO IT or AIM AT IT - or TARGET IT. so you SLIP INTO 1 at the start from (classically) 5 (or 4 or 2 or 1.5 or 7.5 - i.e. chromatic stuff).
and i'm only stressing the situation at the start because its an easy point to pick - this is true WHATEVER sound you're thinking of and wherever it occurs in the tune. So if you're thinking of a 2 chord at the beginning of bar 5 then you need to start playing that 2 chord FROM SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN THE 2 CHORD.
try this with any bit of any piece - and if you've got the no-foward-motion-blues (which i think an awful lot of student-players have) - you will notice an immediate improvement.
i'll post a vid of a medium tempo blues to illustrate this later today.
-
I thought that modal interchange meant to borrow and chords from the parallel minor (i.e., e.g., borrowing chords from E flat in the key of C ).
I can't keep track of all the names for all the modes of melodic minor and what not. But in terms of interesting subs for a mixolydian ( or any Dominant chord), i'm happy to mix and match the playing of a melodic minor either a whole step down, a half step above, a P4 for above, or P5 above. Basically that's one pitch collection I can move around and mix-and-match.
That's the simplest and most elegant way I can think about incorporating out lines in a fundamental way that is easy to keep track of and understand. I need to keep things as simple as possible and not to over complicate matters. .
-
Borrowing from any mode, really.
You play a G7#5 as part of a ii V I in Cmaj, that's modal interchange.
-
I've played with targets all my life. What I mean is that when I have a harmonic progression, I "see" the voice leading line I want to use, and I want to use the notes in that line to be my "guideposts" for negotiating that set of changes. I am going to prolong, embellish, ornament...whatever those notes.
I honestly thought that was what people meant when they said they were "making the changes"
I learned early on that you can blow bebop over anything and sound plausible to your average listener, but the guys that were up on the bandstand knew the difference, and so I wanted to make sure they knew that I knew what I was doing
so if a change had a note that was out of the key, I am for sure going to play that note where it needs to be and resolve it where it needs to go so that anybody who knows WTF they are doing will know that I'm not just blowing notes to see where they land, but that I'm "making the changes"
this way also works pretty well when you want to play key on key or play off the upper structure, too
-
for the benefit of those of us who had to learn this out on the street, what is "CST"?
-
Chord Scale Theory.
So, the general idea that each chord, or group of chords in a tune, can be addressed using a particular note set or "scale" or "mode." It's a "jazz went to college" concept, but it can be pretty helpful in navigating some tunes.
-
Yes indeed - the ones you cannot actually hear especially..... Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
And with "Inner Urge" I'm sure there were no charts - just spontaneous improve....LOL - a real toe-tapper.
I get asked to play that song all the time.
I play that on piano. Left hand - alternating F# and C - the tritone. Right hand plays B-C#- Eb- G and move that chord up and down randomly. I'm serious. Try it. Actually that chord in the right hand sounds good if you use the thumb to play the A a whole step below the B and the fifth finger plays the high F once in a while in place of the G and play A-Bb-C#-E in the right hand now and then...and hey, if you make a mistake once in a while, who will notice?
And man, does that tune sound great as a chord-melody style on guitar....Last edited by targuit; 09-12-2016 at 01:18 PM.
-
Just because tunes weren't originally composed with this in mind doesn't mean that they don't lend themselves to a chord scale approach. In fact in the case of a lot of early jazz repertoire - the sparseness of the progression suits them towards this type of improvisation. Lage Lund's soloing on Limehouse Blues springs to mind.
It depends what you want to do really.
Now here's something I just realised - so, as far as I can see, most modern players - the Kurts, Gilads, Moreno etc etc - seem to use a mixture of acquired bebop language (that gets referred to language) and chord scale techniques... I think that's the way it's generally taught in colleges, probably because that's the way their teachers learned at the time.
So there seems be a separation here - bop language might not be analysed in a scalar way - essentially acquired by ear from solos and used in whatever key or context as required on ii-V's etc - while CST can be used as a resource for more modern soloing. Apologies if that seems brain numbingly obvious to you.
I played a friend (not a guitarist) that early Lage solo the other day, and he said 'he sounds great really relaxed, it's not like he has a lot of language, but it sounds great.'
It's interesting because I actually heard that solo as being really good bebop with a modern tinge although I think most people equate bop with licks and therefore language.
This is a comment I hear a lot from colleagues who are Jazz programme graduates (i.e. most of them) 'so and so doesn't have any language but is an amazing improviser', 'oh so and so has so much language.'
Personally I don't think this way these days, which is largely down to Barry. To me everything is language, but everything is also derived from scales, arpeggios and so on. Jordan's tetrad (?) approach seems geared this way too, which is interesting. Bop language is completely open to analysis, but CST isn't quite right for it.
There are many sounds that aren't standard that get used a lot - what Bud or Bird does on a VI7 for example, the fact they play IVm6 on a #ivo7 sound. There are sounds that aren't really used - musicians of the bop era wouldn't have played a #11 on a I major very often and so on and so forth.
This makes perfect sense, the musicians who first got into the modal approach weren't interested in recreating historical sounds, they wanted to explore this new world. This is because they were already playing seven shades of shit out of bebop. Joe Zawinul, for instance, had already learned to play exactly like Barry Harris before striking out into this new world. Or Gary Burton with Hank Garland...
(Now, of course, what Mark Levine calls the scale revolution is part of the tradition itself.)
So I figure a lot of people treat 'language' (i.e. lines acquired from the tradition) and CST material separately - or perhaps use bop language in some interesting CST contexts if they are into that stuff. In either case people learn bebop lines that work on ii-V's without necessarily building them from the ground up BH style.
Anyway this is all a bit OT, but just occurred to me. Probably dead obvious to a lot of people, but I am too young to have seen it at the time,Last edited by christianm77; 09-12-2016 at 01:07 PM.
-
Yeah, the overlap is important. These aren't antithetical views we're talking about, but it often gets painted as such.
-
Hey, Reg I'm interested in your terminology especially regarding "tonal targets". I'm assuming you mean really outlining the function of the chord of the moment ( dominant, tonic etc.) rather than generalizing the harmony of the key or abstracting with less functional, symmetrical patterns. Seems like you're usually talking about defining basic harmony and then elaborating somewhat on the weak side of beats/patterns or on second run-throughs. Originally Posted by Reg
Also, slightly confusing is the use of the term "target " in other contexts. Most people who talk about "targeting" tend to use it in a more one-dimensional context: melodic devices such as enclosures for targeting specific pitches. You talk about it , seems like, more in terms of form, rhythm , and harmony... as well as melody.
In the past, you've mentioned Schoenburg and others as influences, and I'd be curious to know if there are specific people who influenced your thinking and terminology for some of this. Anyway, I've always found it very compelling. Much of it is beyond me, in text form, but makes a lot of sense in your playing. I'm always interested in how spacial/rhythmic aspects make things fit which otherwise wouldn't, harmonically, and can make "outside" sound "in".
-
ok, so I didn't know the acronym, but I understand the idea. I use that, too, in a way.
aside from the target notes, whenever a progression is all in the same key, I might play that scale and let my ear pull me around.
so if you think of "Rhythm Changes" I could play in Bb for 4 bars and then use target notes for bars 5 and 6 and then end my phrase in Bb. That might be all the thinking I'm really doing.
If its all diatonic, then you can stay in one key and just blow bop lines. If you have changes that introduced notes outside the key, then target those notes
using both of those two approaches, you can get around most jazz tunes.
Reply With Quote
5 Guitars - Neck Pickup - Jazzblues: Danocaster,...
Today, 04:40 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos