Target Notes vs Playing the Changes

[matt.guitarteacher]

Yeah, the overlap is important. These aren't antithetical views we're talking about, but it often gets painted as such.

Read in a book recently about the "problem" of calling "what you play over a ii chord".... "Dorian". Went through a long description of how this is technically wrong , and distinctions between tonal and modal music etc.

....but then, in the end, basically sums up with something like "...but sometimes it's just easier to have the casual use of the term for ease of communication". Ha! :-)

[whiskey02]

christian 77 said:
"I find that a lot of time can be profitably spent consistently applying very simple ideas".

There's more truth and common sense in these few words than anything I've read in a long long time. Its brilliance is deceptively simple and so, often missed or passed over.
I've posted recently in a thread I don't feel like searching for, that most great players have an unbreakable grasp and command of "the basics" to which they add a small handful of their personal favorite spices & devices to the recipe that makes them consistently sound 1) great and 2) distinctly individual.

[Hep To The Jive]

It's a really interesting discussion, and fun thread, but it's so long and wordy and deviates a lot, so I'd love to clear Making Changes vs Targeting, what in reality that means? Can somebody who can play AND understands both concepts make a video, like playing over iii- vi- ii-v- i or a blues or something, anything, and show example A vs example B, you know what i mean?

Call me lazy, but I never learn well through the written word as far as music goes, even though I maybe do have an idea, but it's not quite clear... Maybe there are more people like me?

Also regarding modern modal tunes like Inner Urge, it's really not fair to say people who don't dig it don't dig fusion, or in general 'if you don't like this, you must not like that'. It's far from truth. I for one do not enjoy this tune, my gf doesn't like it, my dog hates it... But I don't mind fusion at all... And I think Spain is beautiful song too! Not liking certain tunes doesn't equate to anything. It's just that, some tunes are bad for you.

[lawson-stone]

From one Jay to another, that was what I was talking about doing.

First of all, let's be clear about something. Any first class guitar player creates arrangements including Joe Pass. The song is the song. If I play My Romance, I hear the song in my head. I can improvise off the song, but the first thing is to play the song as the composer wrote the damn thing. Then once you show you can actually recreate it as written, go off and try to impress someone that you are "improvising". And many of the top flight musicians whom you might have thought were just playing off the top of their head are playing nearly the same notes every night. Just with a different tempos or style.

Improvisation does not happen as a tabula rosa, unless you are creating a song out of thin air. If you know the song standard and understand music, the arrangement is already in your head. You are not creating ex nihilo.

In the Joe Pass video entitled An Evening with Joe Pass (1994) he comments about how he learned songs with his ears and as he put it the old fashioned way with learning the melody and the chords as C - Dm7 - Em7 - Ebdim7 - etc. No modes. No CST. Just big ears. An he could play bebop guitar better than most anyone I can think of.

You're really not thinking here about jazz improvisation, but about a kind of counter-melody to the original melody. Such a counter-melody really cannot "live" except as a companion to the original melody. But a very great deal of jazz improvisation really does entail composing fresh melodies over the changes with little or no reference to or dependence on the "original" tune. The title simply denotes the set of changes, the playing of the tune establishes the framework for the listener. The improvised melody is constructed from the "language" that the player prefers, whether the bebop vocabulary, the older swing vocabulary, or some other jazz-related idiom. The changes provide scalar tracks or harmonic prompts, linking the elements of the player's vocabulary in a distinctive manner. At least that's something I seem to hear a lot.

However much talk we hear about the "original" melodies or tunes, for most jazz players, it's really the changes and the chance to launch into a fresh melodic path through them.

And your idea that "the first thing is to play the song as the composer wrote the d*** thing" is just wrong. That might be your starting point, but it has no binding force on anyone else. Most jazz players play the tune as they received it from the players they enjoyed, respected, and learned from. You can say that's wrong, but it doesn't matter. It's what happens.

Jazz is not a music that is about "what ought to be" but rather about "what actually is."

[targuit]

Lawson, I agree in large measure with what you wrote. However, about stating the melody - what is it that Socrates said that before a man learns to walk, he must crawl? Well, maybe it wasn't Socrates. I wasn't around back then. But, it is still true. Most musicians tend to 'state the melody' before they venture off into flights of their imagination. But, I digress.

Given the premise that my opinion is just that, I feel that those who cannot perform the music as composed use "improvisation" as a convenient excuse. I am as impressed as you are after a great musician puts his interpretation of a song on his performance. But your own idol, Joe Pass, in his final years often recorded the songs more as they were written rather than indulge in creative 'flights of fancy". I am referring to songs he recorded on his CD "Unforgettable" recorded near the end of his life as an example. Maybe it has something to do with getting old.

So you want me to record Autumn Leaves? No problem. Do you prefer the key of G or Bb? Well, doesn't matter. I interrupted this post to play through both of them and also in Dm/F. So I think I'll do it in F. Glad you told me, since before this I had been rehearsing several tunes this evening including The Nearness of You, But Beautiful, My Foolish Heart, My Romance, Fly Me to the Moon, You Are too Beautiful, and Laura. I will now add Autumn Leaves to the pile. I do this most every night. These are just an incomplete list of tunes that I have studied and "learned". Learned for me means "know the melody and harmony well enough to pull off a credible performance".

I don't claim to be Joe Pass. But I can play and sing these tunes confidently. I have links to my YouTube site, which apparently no one listens to for verification that I can acquit myself reasonably well for a guy who spent his post graduate life becoming a doctor (MD) and practicing medicine for over a quarter of a century (bummer!). In some ways a total waste of precious time. It certainly distracted me from playing music. If my singing distracts you from enjoying the guitar playing behind it, you should realize that I am interested in the "total package" musically. The overall performance as well as the impact of the performance on the vast audience that enjoys my playing daily. Perhaps "vast" is the wrong word. My son always says "You play fine, Dad, but all the music you play is so old!" He does have a point.

So I also can play country and classical guitar. And piano. Imagine that - un wunderkind. But I do want to say that I do indeed play along to videos on YT - one way I practice. In a desperate and pathetic attempt to stay relevant, I put "Best songs of 2016" in the YT search the other day and played along to a bunch of Adele songs and others whose name I don't recall. She is pretty damn good.

Anyway, it's a good excuse for me to record tomorrow and waste more of my lifetime in this pointless pursuit of a music that few people are interested in listening to anymore. A grand project for the future for sure. Like deciding to be an entrepreneur with a start up promising to deliver horse and buggy wagons. Can the IPO be far behind?

[emanresu]

That was a good simple no nonsense workshop about this op.. quite hard to find:

[grahambop]

Getting back to the OP's post, it's instructive to listen to Dexter Gordon playing rhythm changes e.g. his version of Red Cross. He tends to alternate between playing very complex lines which follow the changes, and playing much simpler, longer notes which sort of 'ride over' the changes, e.g. a simple blues phrase or a repeated note like Lester Young.

After one of those long 'blues' phrases on the A section he will typically unleash his most complex lines on the bridge. So it can make for a nice contrast.

[princeplanet]

Getting back to the OP's post, it's instructive to listen to Dexter Gordon playing rhythm changes e.g. his version of Red Cross. He tends to alternate between playing very complex lines which follow the changes, and playing much simpler, longer notes which sort of 'ride over' the changes, e.g. a simple blues phrase or a repeated note like Lester Young.

After one of those long 'blues' phrases on the A section he will typically unleash his most complex lines on the bridge. So it can make for a nice contrast.

Everyone should try to get a clue from Dexter, he personifies straight ahead but with a very forward leaning hipness that never gets old. Trouble is, no one can! Not even tenor guys, you just can't touch that thing he's got. It's not his sense of form, pool of notes, grasp of harmony - that , you could probably copy - but it's the attitude, it directs everything he plays, the humour, the sarcasm, even the tenderness..... Copying his form, phrasing, or lines would be just like studying a text version of 10 minutes of a Robin Williams standup set, and learning to apply the phrasing, timing, and dynamic form to your own comedy routine. Somethings just won't transfer. Better to develop your own attitude, and let that influence your own sense of dynamic form.

At least, that's the lesson I finally took away from LTD...

[lawson-stone]

Lawson, I agree in large measure with what you wrote. However, about stating the melody - what is it that Socrates said that before a man learns to walk, he must crawl? Well, maybe it wasn't Socrates. I wasn't around back then. But, it is still true. Most musicians tend to 'state the melody' before they venture off into flights of their imagination. But, I digress.

Given the premise that my opinion is just that, I feel that those who cannot perform the music as composed use "improvisation" as a convenient excuse. I am as impressed as you are after a great musician puts his interpretation of a song on his performance. But your own idol, Joe Pass, in his final years often recorded the songs more as they were written rather than indulge in creative 'flights of fancy". I am referring to songs he recorded on his CD "Unforgettable" recorded near the end of his life as an example. Maybe it has something to do with getting old.

So you want me to record Autumn Leaves? No problem. Do you prefer the key of G or Bb? Well, doesn't matter. I interrupted this post to play through both of them and also in Dm/F. So I think I'll do it in F. Glad you told me, since before this I had been rehearsing several tunes this evening including The Nearness of You, But Beautiful, My Foolish Heart, My Romance, Fly Me to the Moon, You Are too Beautiful, and Laura. I will now add Autumn Leaves to the pile. I do this most every night. These are just an incomplete list of tunes that I have studied and "learned". Learned for me means "know the melody and harmony well enough to pull off a credible performance".

I don't claim to be Joe Pass. But I can play and sing these tunes confidently. I have links to my YouTube site, which apparently no one listens to for verification that I can acquit myself reasonably well for a guy who spent his post graduate life becoming a doctor (MD) and practicing medicine for over a quarter of a century (bummer!). In some ways a total waste of precious time. It certainly distracted me from playing music. If my singing distracts you from enjoying the guitar playing behind it, you should realize that I am interested in the "total package" musically. The overall performance as well as the impact of the performance on the vast audience that enjoys my playing daily. Perhaps "vast" is the wrong word. My son always says "You play fine, Dad, but all the music you play is so old!" He does have a point.

So I also can play country and classical guitar. And piano. Imagine that - un wunderkind. But I do want to say that I do indeed play along to videos on YT - one way I practice. In a desperate and pathetic attempt to stay relevant, I put "Best songs of 2016" in the YT search the other day and played along to a bunch of Adele songs and others whose name I don't recall. She is pretty damn good.

Anyway, it's a good excuse for me to record tomorrow and waste more of my lifetime in this pointless pursuit of a music that few people are interested in listening to anymore. A grand project for the future for sure. Like deciding to be an entrepreneur with a start up promising to deliver horse and buggy wagons. Can the IPO be far behind?

I have had trouble finishing this statement because you use such demeaning language. Improvisation is not "flights of fancy" and I know very, very few musicians who use improvisation as a substitute for not being able to play the melody. Melodies are actually a good bit easier than most improvisation, at least for me and many I know.

As long as you seem improvisation as "flights of fancy" I think you miss the point. Improvisation, even done less than brilliantly, is still one of the most important and fulfilling skills any musician can acquire, and in jazz it is absolutely central. Along with swing, improvisation is the sine qua non of jazz.

Also, you refer to Joe Pass as my "idol." That term implies an uncritical, unreflective and unreasonable adoration that I do not have. You mildly insult me but suggesting that. I like Joe Pass' playing a lot. It was my privilege to have some interaction with him, and I was asked to be present at his funeral. One of his last requests was for Ellen to send me a stack of his books he had set aside for me. That means I cared for him, and I do admire him. But I recognize the limits and boundaries on his playing as any thinking musician would.

I will try to read the rest of your post later today if other more important tasks get completed in time.

[Reg]

The term Target can have many layers of understanding and application.... so before you say here we go again, Reg talking in strange languages and some other reality, I tend to believe many can't understand what I say most of the time because they either choose not to or don't understand the language. Generally we're talking about Jazz, and how to play, perform and maybe even understand.

Targets are not just a simple melodic concept... the first layer of usage and understanding of using the technique of targeting can be. Where one is simply choosing specific tones or notes at some spatial locations of a melodic line.

Anyway here is an example, I have to get out of town, I'll try and post examples when i get back on Sunday.

the first line is basic line, Guide tone line or.... Targets of 4 bar phrase.

the second line is expanded targets, hinting at becoming Tonal targets

the third example is added changes, new expanded Tonal Targets

the fourth example is developing the targets with expanded harmony as reference

the fifth example is 5 part arranging of the Tonal Targets from example #2'

I could keep going... right, add more changes for expanded references from which to develop melodic Top Line, the basic melody. The rest of the lines are support of the melody using the expanded Harmony as reference.

So the targets, become Tonal Targets.

You can simply work or create from a melodic reference, develop the top melodic line on it's own and let the changes develop from the melody... But generally the line doesn't always work and you'll end up going back and fixing the top, lead or melody line to actually have functional relationships with harmonic reference. It's not that melody or harmony are the most important, right or wrong etc... It's just with out actually being aware of both when you move down that musical road to understanding etc... you'll hit wall and lots of wrong notes, I didn't say bad. But when you become aware of references and relationships in music... you'll realize what you hear or feel isn't always the logical of best choice. And generally that is from not being aware of what might be going on musically.

[Reg]

Yea Modal Interchange is the next level of Borrowing. Borrowing pulls changes from Relative or Parallel Relationships... but here is the big point or difference... Borrowing still use the melodic and harmonic organization from IONIAN.

The 1st Mode or Ionian.... Key of "C"... the harmonic organization of how note relationships and which notes have the power in those relationships. Major/Minor Functional Harmony. What almost all western music is based on... the only reference is always Ionian.... I IV V I Tonic, sub dominant, Dominant, Tonic.

When one uses modal interchange... those note relationships and which notes have the power to create movement or Function... has different possibilities based on which Mode one used.

Different Modes and other organizations of Note.... can have different different relationships which create Function or harmonic and melodic movement.

[matt.guitarteacher]

So, anyway, my question still, regarding the OP, how is it different from 'making the changes'? Like the 4th line in your example, I would construct something like that thinking of chords, the changes, because it outlines it nicely. So where is the difference? Still don't get that part.

I think we veered off that angle. "Jazz theory resources" has entire chapters on "harmonic generalization" and "harmonic specificity" if you're interested in that concept. Harmonic generalization could be targeting chord tones of the tonic triad (chromatically or otherwise, like my previous short example), without respect to the chord of the moment.

Playing a single blues scale across the entire form, or even just sections, is a type of generalization, although an entirely different beast. We all understand go you can, for example, play pitches from the blues scale which aren't actually related to the chord of the moment. Ligon has some good examples of generalizing over rhythm changes bridges and such. I haven't really played too much with this. Just know it's there.

To my ears, Wes Montgomery does a good bit of this. "Dearly beloved" springs to mind as a possible example. I haven't transcribed it, but it doesn't sound harmonically specific the way I remember it. Part of that may be the tune itself though. His take on Misty as well. Top of my head without listening back.

[Reg]

So generally playing the changes is just that, somewhat of a learning process to become aware of what changes can imply. And more importantly with jazz... what the possibilities are that the changes can imply.

Targeting can be the changes, but that is pretty vanilla, right. The next step one takes when playing the changes and using some type of melodic or harmonic organization... is for the targets to have new relationships, right. The changes are the Reference of the Target application... now what framework do you put those changes in, what relationships. I could use an approach application, maybe all dominant chords with some type of modal reference, as simple as using all altered Dominant chords as the approach, so I'm basically using a Minor reference for all targets which leads to Altered Dominant approaches, either V's or bII's of each target, which opens the Melodic minor Door and creates easy access to Blue Notes with organization as compared to Random or what one hears or feels. Which as I've said can suck.

The main point is to understand that there are many options of using the Target application... Tonal Targets personally or when your able to get past melodic only concepts and also include harmonic implication.

[targuit]

Here I hope is the shortcut link to John Hall's excellent commentary on 'target tones'. I'm posting this because some seem to have some difficulty finding this article. I'm not shilling in any way for John beyond my pure admiration for his talent and lovely original music as well as his generosity of spirit. There is so much to be learned in his company, and I recommend listening to his Influences, 21 Etudes Intermediate for guitar - works of great beauty and technical skill. You can listen to them under his Buy section.

While on this target tone page, listen to his Bachianas Americanas. A brilliant use of Bach themes transformed by John into a fabulous tour de force.

John Hall | Music for Guitar | Blog : Target-Tone Improvisation

[mr. beaumont]

Here I hope is the shortcut link to John Hall's excellent commentary on 'target tones'. I'm posting this because some seem to have some difficulty finding this article. I'm not shilling in any way for John beyond my pure admiration for his talent and lovely original music as well as his generosity of spirit. There is so much to be learned in his company, and I recommend listening to his Influences, 21 Etudes Intermediate for guitar - works of great beauty and technical skill. You can listen to them under his Buy section.

While on this target tone page, listen to his Bachianas Americanas. A brilliant use of Bach themes transformed by John into a fabulous tour de force.

John Hall | Music for Guitar | Blog : Target-Tone Improvisation

Yeah, it's cool stuff, really kind of along the idea of "guide tones." Not totally what Groyniad's thread is about, but certainly part of it.

Here, I'll break down kind of my approach to this. I'm not as advanced at this stuff as Reg is, but it might prove to be a starting point for someone, at least.

Here's a breakdown of our Song of the Month (well, part of it) "My Funny Valentine."

Now, Valentine is often played ballad-style, so think of thi as maybe the way I'd approach it if I were to play it more "med up" like Jim Hall and Bill Evans do on "Undercurrent."

Ok, so the changes--

C- | C-maj7 | C-7 | C-6 | Abmaj | F-7 | D-7b5 | G7b9 |

So I see 4 bars of C minor...Ab and F- coming from Ab maj...and then a dominant area-- the ii V

I can also see that C-6 in bar as a F dominant sound, now, it doesn't go to Bb, but it's still something of a transition...ok, I'll hold on to that for a minute.

So with my C minor area, I can work just C minor...I can explore melodic minor ideas...then go to an F dominant idea on the F7...play something to pull me to Ab. That's my first "target," if you will. So I have options there, as there's lots of ways to pull to a major chord, not just it's V...

Then, I treat the next two chords as a "I." Tonic area, can think Ab maj, any arpeggio associated with Ab maj, really...then my next target-- a dominant area. I can again think various MM, can go HM, or play anything that pulls me to Cm again, as that's bar 9's chord.

So I'm less thinking about addressing every chord and more about creating some signposts that give me options. I'm not planning out a solo, but I'm thinking about a route. My guess is, with plenty of practice, this stuff can happen more "in the moment," or simply, if I shed enough, I'll have multiple access points available.

Maybe the second time through my target becomes more of a note thing...so obviously, we can hear C to B to Bb to A over those first 4 chords...what if I kept a descending line going over the next 4? So it becomes kind of a new melody to play off of (or I guess, I countermelody to play off of)

Anyway, I'm just thinking out loud without an instrument. But this would be a basic approach. I'll go home and actually do some of this and report back.

[David B]

Always worth watching again.

[Jonah]

I think I got ya! Targetting is basically still playing changes, but altering dominant chords and taking liberties with substitutions to create lines... so basically more advance thinking of harmony.

it's all playing changes... if we just use that term for reference to basic harmony of a song.

but in my understanding it's diferent if if take it as a concept... if your concept is jus 'playing changer' you will sound very static even with extended harmonies and all... because all you do is play a chord then play another chord etc.

if you apply targeting ... you imply relations... because that's where the targets come from, that's why they are the targets...
it is one of the ways to make it all work together.. and the levels and concepts can be very diferent...

[Boston Joe]

Yeah, it's cool stuff, really kind of along the idea of "guide tones." Not totally what Groyniad's thread is about, but certainly part of it.

Here, I'll break down kind of my approach to this. I'm not as advanced at this stuff as Reg is, but it might prove to be a starting point for someone, at least.

(...)

Excellent! The C-6=F7 thing is still new to me, so I didn't spot it right away. Not sure how F7 can pull to Ab. I'll need to experiment.)

[Reg]

Yea Mr B... that can be an application of using targets. And generally it's not a bad idea to think about these things without your guitar in hand. Most guitarist tend to have their guitar play them... and develop theory from what they can play etc...

And yes down the line... all this stuff is very simple. Like using chord tones from the target of a chord with harmonic reference. Developing or embellishing a melodic line and also being aware of harmonic reference(s).

[christianm77]

Excellent! The C-6=F7 thing is still new to me, so I didn't spot it right away. Not sure how F7 can pull to Ab. I'll need to experiment.)

It's an extension of the line cliche

C B Bb A Ab

Cm Cm(maj7) Cm7 Cm6 Abmaj7/C (or Cmb6)

With the bass moving:

Cm Cm/B Cm/Bb Am7b5 (or Cm6/A) Abmaj7

[Boston Joe]

OK, so you're thinking of the C-6 as an A-7b5. That makes sense to me, in terms of a pull to Ab, because you could also think of it as an A7#9b5 without the third. Or even better an Ebsusb9b13(phrygian).

[Reg]

Hey Mr B

Isn't C- the relative VI- of Eb which is the key of the tune.

VI-, VI-ma7 (VI-ma7 usually implies V7 of target VI-), VI-7 to VI-6 usually implies II V... so a borrowing (could be Modal Interchange)

So / C- / G7alt / C-7 / F7 /

Then the Abmaj7 is the IV chord... subdominant and the F-7 is a functional diatonic sub of Abmaj7... or just think functional, sub dominant type of movement.

Then the standard Dominant function back to C- or Tonic

What I'm getting at is you generally start with a analysis of what your using... then start the target or Tonal Target applications. But who cares... your getting the concept which will show up in your playing.

[lawson-stone]

Excellent! The C-6=F7 thing is still new to me, so I didn't spot it right away. Not sure how F7 can pull to Ab. I'll need to experiment.)

Actually, the F9/C-6 chord contains F A Eb G C, and the AbMaj7 has Ab C Eb G so the chord tones are almost all there. Positionally, if you are playing this at the 8th fret, you have the notes of the AbMaj7 on the first 3 strings, just lowering the A on the 4th string gives you Ab from the C-6/F9/Am7b5 shape.

[christianm77]

Hey Mr B

Isn't C- the relative VI- of Eb which is the key of the tune.

VI-, VI-ma7 (VI-ma7 usually implies V7 of target VI-), VI-7 to VI-6 usually implies II V... so a borrowing (could be Modal Interchange)

So / C- / G7alt / C-7 / F7 /

Then the Abmaj7 is the IV chord... subdominant and the F-7 is a functional diatonic sub of Abmaj7... or just think functional, sub dominant type of movement.

Then the standard Dominant function back to C- or Tonic

What I'm getting at is you generally start with a analysis of what your using... then start the target or Tonal Target applications. But who cares... your getting the concept which will show up in your playing.

Yes, that works as well. In fact I used to substitute the progression this way IIRC but haven't toyed with this for a while.

Obviously a very common progression so worth looking at. In general I tend to play just over Cm but this would give a more bop sound I think.

C- | C-maj7 | C-7 | C-6 | Abmaj | F-7 | D-7b5 | G7b9 |

becomes

C- | G7 | C-7 | F7 | F-7 | Bb7 | D-7b5 | G7b9 |

Fm7 Bb7 Dm7b5 G7b9 is a pretty common move in the repetoire. You could go Bb7 and raise the Bb to a B, Barry Harris style of course :-) I'm a sucker for the path of least resistance. Keeping things simple, I would think G9(#5) BTW rather than G7b9 or Galt BTW, but you could make either work I'm sure.

Let's Bazza it (that's my new verb, do you like it?):

C melodic minor | % | F dominant | % | Bb dominant | % | Bb dominant (#1) | % |

I'll blat through that tomorrow. Something to do on things like Puttin' on the Ritz and Blue Skies (urgggh.) I've decided I'm going to make everything sound like blue note, and I don't even care. V dominant on ii minor, yeah baby yeah, flat that seventh.

Now, here's another thing. Variation #2....

Cm | B+ | Eb6/Bb

Play the B whole tone on the second chord. Sounds mega.

[matt.guitarteacher]

So / C- / G7alt / C-7 / F7 /

Nice. I automatically see that as G7alt nowadays, but missed the F7 (probably more basic), like a rookie.

Friggin' Mickey Baker! Ha ! :-)