Official Barry Harris Thread

[Tal_175]

Can you say things are diatonic to the harmonic minor? Or is the harmonic minor an alteration in itself?

I meant that harmonic minor is the alteration. I can see A7alt to Dminor secondary dominant movement in F both diatonically within F with an added leading note (C#) or as a temporary new scale D harmonic minor. I don't know how that can be obscure on the fretboard if one has worked on these scales on the fretboard and can visualize each scale (and individual scale tones).

[Tal_175]

I don't think you've quite understood what I meant. it's up to you whether or not you use the third of the E7 or not.

It seems like maybe I misunderstood you somewhere along the way, but I am not sure how as I was responding to this:

If you think about what the 'run the G7 scale down to the third of E7 etc' actually is, it's altering the leading tone to create a clear cadence into I.

More natural minor + 7, than harmonic minor + b7 in your terms (but that's not the way Barry framed it.)

I get it but it sounds like we are splitting hairs now, lol. Both of the approaches allow for the same phrasal choices which are mostly aural decisions when one is working on line building with these structures. I think your point is that the "natural minor" allows for more reusability of the existing dominant vocabulary. But to me if I am incorporating the "7", a whole new set of ideas emerge in a way that is different that "oh I can add this note or not" type of situation. That note is a part of a word, so to speak, not a letter to be added.

[Christian Miller]

I meant that harmonic minor is the alteration. I can see A7alt to Dminor secondary dominant in F both diatonically within F with an added leading note (C#) or as a temporary new scale D harmonic minor. I don't know how that can be obscure on the fretboard if one has worked on these scales on the fretboard and can visualize each scale (and individual scale tones).

Good for you. I understand what you are saying, BTW.

What I'm saying is that from the perspective of the way Barry actually taught this type of thing, I'm not sure if it's particularly relevant.

We are both riffing a bit here, but I think the thread is primarily focussed on the things Barry actually taught - and the main thing to emphasise is Barry may be a big scales guy - but with the single note improvisation class after the scale outlines were internalised, the idea always seems to be to apply the idiomatic bop lines we are deriving from the scales.

In Barry's school this is done through working with a limited number of scales (major, minor and especially dominant) that we've learned a lot of things to play on and applying in all contexts.

[Tal_175]

For myself this is especially a consideration on tunes like What is This Thing Called Love where you have quite a long stretch of minor II V I. Or Caravan, for that matter. It's so easy to sound repetitious on these tunes if you go in with a harmonic minor on V7 approach.

OK I see what you mean by getting stuck in harmonic minor now. The A section of What is This Thing Called Love can be a Phrygian dominant nightmare, lol. Definitely it's good to unlock variety for those situations or may be just play Cmajor lines.

[Christian Miller]

It seems like maybe I misunderstood you somewhere along the way, but I am not sure how as I was responding to this:

If you think about what the 'run the G7 scale down to the third of E7 etc' actually is, it's altering the leading tone to create a clear cadence into I.

I don't really understand how what you said was a response to that statement.

I get it but it sounds like we are splitting hairs now, lol. Both of the approaches allow for the same phrasal choices which are mostly aural decisions when one is working on line building with these structures. I think your point is that the "natural minor" allows for more reusability of the existing dominant vocabulary. But to me if I am incorporating the "7", a whole new set of ideas emerge in a way that is different that "oh I can add this note or not" type of situation. That note is a part of a word, so to speak, not a letter to be added.

OK, I'll put it this way. Barry sort of goes out of his way not to teach harmonic minor over V7, but presents a totally different way of going about it using the dominant scale. He seemed (as far as I can tell) to feel the harmonic minor was unhelpful here.

You might think the harmonic minor is super awesome and useful, and I might have my own observations on it all, but that doesn't alter that fact. Pun not intended.

[Christian Miller]

OK I see what you mean by getting stuck in harmonic minor now. The A section of What is This Thing Called Love can be a Phrygian dominant nightmare, lol. Definitely it's good to unlock variety for those situations or may be just play Cmajor lines.

I've heard it said by a few different people that "bebop is the study of dominant chords, while modal jazz is the study of tonic chords."

Barry himself said - "let the dominant dominate."

[Tal_175]

I don't really understand how what you said was a response to that statement.

OK, I'll put it this way. Barry sort of goes out of his way not to teach harmonic minor over V7, but presents a totally different way of going about it using the dominant scale. He seemed (as far as I can tell) to feel the harmonic minor was unhelpful here.

You might think the harmonic minor is super awesome and useful, and I might have my own observations on it all, but that doesn't alter that fact. Pun not intended.

I never claimed that Barry Harris described this as harmonic minor + b7 over V7. I was just pointing out the parallel between how he taught minor ii-V's and how it's often described outside of Barry Harris school of teaching.

[Christian Miller]

I never claimed that Barry Harris described this as harmonic minor + b7 over V7. I was just pointing out the parallel between how he taught minor ii-V's and how it's often described outside of Barry Harris school of teaching.

I didn't get that at all from your first post. I thought it was you riffing.

In so much as the diatonic options on a minor II V I are discussed at all, it IS usually from the perspective of harmonic minor, which is probably what Barry was reacting to a little in the lesson.

OK, so is this just splitting hairs? I don't think so. I think that's a philosophical difference.

• In the mainstream approach great attention is paid to how exactly the notes line up over the vanilla chords. Oh it's a #9 here, a b9 here, and so on. A basic axiom is that the default scale on the chord should contain all the notes of that chord.
• In the Barry Harris approach once we get an idea of what scales we are using we aren't really thinking about the way the notes relate to the original chord at all really. We instead focus on what's going on with our line. We are thinking melody in the foreground, and harmony is more of generalised background thing.

so in the first case you have the harmonic minor to accommodate the third of the V7 chord, and maybe add in the #9/b7 as an extra note.
In the Barry approach we say 'meh, we'll play our lines on the IIm7b5 chord (using the dominant) and go to the V7's third if we feel like it.)

[Tal_175]

so in the first case you have the harmonic minor to accommodate the third of the V7 chord, and maybe add in the #9/b7 as an extra note.
In the Barry approach we say 'meh, we'll play our lines on the m7b5 chord (using the dominant) and go to the V7's third if we feel like it.)

In the situations where "we feel like going to the third", we are adding this other note for building phrases (unless we always just robotically only add that as the last note, but I doubt that's what BH meant). In that case whether you see the resulting lines as natural minor + 7 or harmonic minor + b7 is a moot point and not a philosophical difference.

Yes, you don't have to play that note and instead just play minor7b5 chord lines. There are also other options to play there. I guess that's what call philosophical. But if one is working on building vocabulary for the particular option described above as "we feel like going to the third", then again I don't see a meaningful difference in the two approaches.

[Christian Miller]

In the situations where "we feel like going to the third", we are adding this other note for building phrases (unless we always just robotically only add that as the last note, but I doubt that's what BH meant).

Didn't I say this a few posts ago? No, correct, It is not what BH meant. You can put it in if you want, or not.

Often when we put in that note it goes into a diminished chord which is one of the basic ways we learn to connect to a target chord. But it's not the only way.

In that case whether you see the resulting lines as natural minor + 7 or harmonic minor + b7 is a moot point and not a philosophical difference.

In one case you have to think about and have material to use in the harmonic minor scale. In the other case, you don't.

Yes, you don't have to play that note and just play minor7b5 chord lines. There are also other options to play there. I guess you can call that philosophical. But if one is working on building vocabulary for the particular option described above as "we feel like going to the third", then again I don't see a meaningful difference in the two approaches.

Maybe you need to spend some time with the approach. I don't know how else to explain it.

One of the frustrating things about it is that people who haven't spent some time with it keep trying to relate it to other stuff. But it's a really specific process that's streamlined and practical. A lot of the other stuff is really not relevant. One thing is that chord scale theory people fixate on the scales and harmony side of it. But actually, it's about the lines that come out of it and not at all about 'this note on this chord'. The scales themselves are pretty simple.

[Christian Miller]

BTW I'm talking specifically about the single note improvisation material. The harmony stuff is quite different - which might be while a lot of people seem to come in there. And while there's overlap, it's not that much. Mostly the m6-dim scales show up as arpeggiations (chords) in single note lines.

[Tal_175]

Didn't I say this a few posts ago? No, correct, It is not what BH meant. You can put it in if you want, or not.

Often when we put in that note it goes into a diminished chord which is one of the basic ways we learn to connect to a target chord. But it's not the only way.



In one case you have to think about and have material to use in the harmonic minor scale. In the other approach, you don't.



Maybe you need to spend some time with the approach. I don't know how else to explain it.

One of the frustrating things about it is that people who haven't spent some time with it keep talking about stuff that's relevant to other ways of doing it, but not really relevant to this approach and you end up in the woods talking about things that never came in class because we were too busy learning music.

I don't think you understand where I am coming from. I did spend time with the approach of running dominants into each other or using the related dominant for the minor 7b5. I still think the distinction you are making between natural minor + 7 vs harmonic minor + b7 is a bit too lost in the weeds of the method. I don't think anything you said justified the distinction it makes in how you would build lines.

[Christian Miller]

I don't think you understand where I am coming from. I did spend time with the approach of running dominants into each other or using the related dominant for the minor 7b5.

I mean how much dominant scale stuff have you explored? How much dominant bebop vocabulary do you have? You probably wouldn't see much value in doing it Barry's way unless you'd spent quite a bit of time with that.

Again, if you are serious about it, I think you have to spend a bit of time, preferably with Barry's masterclasses in whatever form you can access them. It takes time to understand what it is and isn't.

ATM I feel I'm often in the position of apparently being expected to explain/justify the method in text form to someone who is really more invested in a different method, and it's not the most productive use of my time, I have to say.

I still think the distinction you are making between natural minor + 7 vs harmonic minor + b7 is a bit too lost in the weeds of the method. I don't think anything you said justified the distinction it makes in how you would build lines.

One requires you to use and think about the harmonic minor, the other doesn't.

[Tal_175]

I mean how much dominant scale stuff have you explored? How much dominant bebop vocabulary do you have? You probably wouldn't see much value in doing it Barry's way unless you'd spent quite a bit of time with that.

Again, if you are serious about it, I think you have to spend a bit of time, preferably with Barry's masterclasses in whatever form you can access them. It takes time to understand what it is and isn't.

ATM I feel I'm often in the position of apparently being expected to explain/justify the method in text form to someone who is really more invested in a different method, and it's not the most productive use of my time, I have to say.



One requires you to use and think about the harmonic minor, the other doesn't.

I don't feel the need to give too much personal information but I spent more time in Barry Harris method and masterclasses based on his teachings than you probably realize. The crunch of my point is line building with the natural minor + 7 is not philosophically different notion than harmonic minor + b7. The fact that BH didn't use this terminology does not suggest a person who is viewing it other way must create completely different phrases. At least I have not read anything you said that justifies this conclusion. You are building a line with an added note to your dominant vocabulary. That doesn't rule out one to consider this added note together with the other notes when building lines with a more collective view. This may, for example, result in different arpeggios than found in the dominant scale perhaps those that happen to also come from the harmonic minor scale. Perhaps you didn't do that. That's fine. I didn't read anything in your posts that clarify exactly how that must necessarily be a different process, If you just want to make the claim but not bother describing it, again that's fine. You could've said that in the beginning. It is also possible that you are attributing your personal interpretation to your experience in the workshops and generalizing it to as an indisputable outcome of the approach.

[Christian Miller]

Hopefully I’ve been clear in saying what is my own interpretation or riff on it and what I personally heard Barry discuss in class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GuyBoden]

Minor 6th Diminished or..............................................

If this is in relation to my earlier post, I was talking about the major 6th diminished scale.

No, I was only highlighting the fact that some players know the BH scales by other names.

I follow this thread because I have the Talk Jazz book, which uses the BH method.

Thanks, all good, lots to learn.

[Christian Miller]

I don't feel the need to give too much personal information but I spent more time in Barry Harris method and masterclasses based on his teachings than you probably realize. The crunch of my point is line building with the natural minor + 7 is not philosophically different notion than harmonic minor + b7.

It is not clear to me that you have made this point. I don't know what else to say, TBH. One involves the harmonic minor the other doesn't.

The fact that BH didn't use this terminology does not suggest a person who is viewing it other way must create completely different phrases.

This is a thread focused on Barry Harris's approach? You seem to be discussing the Tal175 method.

At least I have not read anything you said that justifies this conclusion. You are building a line with an added note to your dominant vocabulary. That doesn't rule out one to consider this added note together with the other notes when building lines with a more collective view. This may, for example, result in different arpeggios than found in the dominant scale perhaps those that happen to also come from the harmonic minor scale.

BTW Barry used the term "arpeggio" in a hyper specific way. I assume you are using it in the more conventional sense to mean any melodic expression of a chord.

You can do all of that if you like, and this can even all be part of the Barry Harris approach further down the road. It's not a closed system. What I'm trying to describe is the basic approach Barry taught on minor dominants - and to point out that this was framed largely to avoid explicitly using harmonic minor. Instead it crops up tacitly, most often through the use of the third of the V7 chord and the associated diminished chord to link to the I.

He also literally said, 'don't get stuck in the harmonic minor'.

I'm not the authority on any of this - I can only report what I heard Barry say and teach directly, and it's likely I don't have the whole picture. If Chris Parks says this is all nonsense, I would go with him. Sadly Alan is no longer with us to offer his thoughts. OTOH I don’t think either would have much interest in comparing BH to other approaches.

My own feeling is that such comparisons are a waste of time and energy if your interest is in learning to play jazz better.

All that said, I do have reasons to think I've got a good grasp of what he would teach as the core of his approach - and as far as I can see you aren't citing anything that Barry himself taught.

Perhaps you didn't do that. That's fine. I didn't read anything in your posts that clarify exactly how that must necessarily be a different process, If you just want to make the claim but not bother describing it, again that's fine.

I'm not sure what you want out of the process. To validate your interpretation? This is the Barry Harris thread.

If I have to explain the system, I'd always rather make a video. But that's unnecessary in any case, there are plenty of sources available now, including from the man himself. Barry didn't rationalise or justify things a great deal, and a lot of the conversation we've been having has been about exactly that, and a bit unnecessary TBH. It's a practical method.

But the method itself is pretty clear, this is the way he taught minor II-V-I to us nuggets. Take it or leave it.

You could've said that in the beginning. It is also possible that you are attributing your personal interpretation to your experience in the workshops and generalizing it to as an indisputable outcome of the approach.

I think I've been reasonably clear in disambiguating what Barry himself taught and said, and what's my own view of it. While it's on me to try to communicate things clearly, I'm not entirely sure you've always read my posts carefully. Personal interpretation does inevitably creep in a bit - for example Howard Rees sometimes editorialises a bit in the DVD set workbooks. But the exercises are as Barry taught them and the DVD set has him of course teaching directly all of this basic stuff in a structured way, which is why I recommend them.

So to be clear - the natural minor plus 7 thing is my interpretation of minor key harmony based on historical pre-19th century practices and the way Barry approached things. It's a synthesis of different things. This is not how Barry himself framed it to my knowledge. I think it's interesting that in both cases what we today call the harmonic minor is seen effectively as an extra or altered note within the minor tonality - the leading tone - or 3rd of V7 - rather than a separate scale that must be learned.

I think modern students of music get a bit caught up in being 'within' one of the scales at any point, whereas both common practice music and pre-Berklee era jazz are a lot more fluid. I could go into more detail on this elsewhere if you like, it's not really something that belongs on this thread, to be fair.

Later on Barry does discuss harmonic minor (DVD II of the Howard Rees set) but more as a tonic scale IIRC. This makes sense.

[Tal_175]

It is not clear to me that you have made this point. I don't know what else to say, TBH. One involves the harmonic minor the other doesn't.

Now I see why we see this differently. To you a scales seem to be just names of things. I see them as having a certain harmonic and melodic purpose. In the sense that I see scales harmonic minor + b7 is just a different name for the same notion as natural minor + 7.

This is a thread focused on Barry Harris's approach? You seem to be discussing the Tal175 method.

We are also not discussing Christian Miller approach but that seems to creep in quite a bit. That's fine if one is clear about the separation (which you are). I think I am being clear when the purpose of what I say is to draw parallels between Barry Harris formulation and the more conventional formulation of a musical notion. That's well within the scope of a thread about Barry Harris approach IMO.

BTW Barry used the term "arpeggio" in a hyper specific way. I assume you are using it in the looser sense to mean any melodic expression of a chord.

You can do all of that if you like, and this can even all be part of the Barry Harris approach further down the road. It's not a closed system. What I'm trying to describe is the basic approach Barry taught on minor dominants - and to point out that this was framed largely to avoid explicitly using harmonic minor. Instead it crops up tacitly, most often through the use of the third of the V7 chord and the associated diminished chord to link to the I.

That is my point. Not sure you get so up and arms about me pointing out this relationship. I mean you said in the thread about Phrygian dominant that the harmonic minor sound over dominant is prevalent in old school jazz. It would be very odd if the basic approach Barry Harris taught excluded pathways to building these sorts of lines.

[Tal_175]

This discussion started with Christian's response to rlrhetts question that involved E-7b5 A7, and playing the C7 scale down to the third of A7 (post #1711).

Just to ground the discussion, here is a Clifford Brown line:



Amin7b5 D7b9 Gmin

Barry Harris basic approach is to play F7 into the third of D7 (F#). That's exactly what's going on here in the first bar into the first beat of the second bar. In the second bar Clifford Brown plays G harmonic minor scale (aka D Phrygian dominant) verbatim. This type of thing is very common in a lot of the traditional bebop playing. Christian, I believe in fact that's one of your criticisms of Mark Levine's book that he claims that harmonic minor scale is not played much. I've pointed this surprising discrepancy in the past.

I've always interpreted BH approach of playing into the 3rd of the dominant (D7) as incorporating that third into the dominant played in the minor7b5 bar (F7) so as to allow for building lines such as shown above. If one incorporates the third of the next chord, then what one ends up with is the harmonic minor scale. The second bar can be seen also as F7 (F dominant scale) with an F#. Although this is just F7b9, note this is different than just playing the diminished scale.

There are two possibilities:
- This interpretation is valid and F7 with the borrowed third from D7 amounts to Harmonic minor and if you also play the note F (as one does commonly as the #9) you get harmonic minor + b7 or G natural minor + 7.

- BH intended playing into the third of D7 as the end of F7 scale. Therefore one cannot come up with a line like Clifford Brown played above using this approach if one assumes this more strict interpretation.

[GuyBoden]

Anyway, if it's a minor ii-V-i, a simple BH method is using the dim scales.

[garybaldy]

Anyway, if it's a minor ii-V-i, a simple BH method is using the dim scales.

So change the Em7b5 to an E7b9? They are quite different chords.

[Christian Miller]

Now I see why we see this differently. To you a scales seem to be just names of things. I see them as having a certain harmonic and melodic purpose. In the sense that I see scales harmonic minor + b7 is just a different name for the same notion as natural minor + 7.

We are also not discussing Christian Miller approach but that seems to creep in quite a bit. That's fine if one is clear about the separation (which you are). I think I am being clear when the purpose of what I say is to draw parallels between Barry Harris formulation and the more conventional formulation of a musical notion. That's well within the scope of a thread about Barry Harris approach IMO.


That is my point. Not sure you get so up and arms about me pointing out this relationship. I mean you said in the thread about Phrygian dominant that the harmonic minor sound over dominant is prevalent in old school jazz. It would be very odd if the basic approach Barry Harris taught excluded pathways to building these sorts of lines.

OK, I'l recap the salient points

- You like to think about the V chord root and the harmonic minor scale
- Barry didn't teach it this way AFAIK
- I have outlined the way the harmonic situation was handled in my response to Rhett's post
- Barry seemed to feel the harmonic minor was something you could over use and get 'stuck in'
- There's definitely harmonic minor in some jazz lines over dominants.
- There's also natural minor and mixed minor scale usage
- I'm moving in my own understanding to harmonic minor being an alteration of natural minor, but that's not really of interest to the thread. I just thought I'd mention it.
- You think this is a moot point, I don't.

Why are we still talking about this HERE?

If you want to talk about minor keys, start another thread please.

[Christian Miller]

The other thing being that the reasons for Barry doing this and other things in slightly unusual ways are perhaps best appreciated by going through the method for a while and not second guessing it.

If that doesn’t convince you, I doubt I will.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[garybaldy]

- I'm moving in my own understanding to harmonic minor being an alteration of natural minor

Isn't that an historic fact? and the melodic minor (with the natural minor descending!) came out of that because the "tone and a half interval was difficult to sing". I'm sure I was taught that in O level music in 1972. Perhaps it was an old wives' tale!

[GuyBoden]

So change the Em7b5 to an E7b9? They are quite different chords.

Secondary Dominant or 'Dominant of the Dominant'?