How do you visualise / see the scales or arpeggios during progressions?

[Jonah]

Absolutely, actually very quickly once you know what's going on.



Oh no, it is unresolved, it's a matter of degree. I spent about 10 minutes last night playing every possible scale/mode over a Dm. However standard the scale (D harmonic minor, F major) it still sounds strange simply because it's not going anywhere.

It's only when you change modes that the differences become apparent. It's still not going anywhere, it's just more interesting. And I think that's the point. It's only sounds in context that create the feeling of modality.



Sure, except one thing. I'm not going to use the word meditative. I'm no materialist but floaty, dreamy, hypnotic, is not meditative. Meditative means in serious thought, not zoning out on something repetitive. Too hippy, man :-)

About resolution... i know what you mean but it is about ear only... sounds within a mode could be resolved too just the logics of this resolution is different. It's mostly based on interval quality and intensity of repetition.

You hear it unresolved I believe mostly because an ear is still waiting some functional resolution logics.

By the way regarding M. B's note above... I agree that jazz modality made it's own world different from early music or ethnic modality.
But still they all have the same logics at the basis

Probably the most specific thing about jazz modality that it is used together with vertical harmony creating kind of modal harmony system which can be even functional in its own way




?????????? ? ????? SM-G570F ????? Tapatalk

[Jonah]

Besides 'not going anywhere' you say.. what do you mean by 'going somewhere' in the context? This could be an answer...

?????????? ? ????? SM-G570F ????? Tapatalk

[henryrobinett]

Of course it is. I assumed we understood that, that the usual way of playing in one key, the ii-V-I etc, was also 'modal' if you like. But it's not really what we're talking about here.

Sure. I don't know what other people do or mean when they talk about music. I don't play those chord sequences modally, for the most part. Not at all.

[mr. beaumont]

Btw, what happened to Footprints?

We could talk footprints, but there would be seven pages discussing the right chords for the turnaround.

I'd be interested in dissecting a "modal" tune that changes a little more frequently...Mirrors, anyone?

[pingu]

We could talk footprints, but there would be seven pages discussing the right chords for the turnaround.

I'd be interested in dissecting a "modal" tune that changes a little more frequently...Mirrors, anyone?

Lol too true !

I don't know 'Mirrors' ,
got a recommended version for me to check out ?

[mr. beaumont]

Joe Chambers tune, don't think it got played much. This version is the one, really...

I was being somewhat provocative, because you could totally view this tune functionally or modally...or both. But maybe that's why it'd be great to analyze. See what you think, I think it's a killer tune.

[Jonah]

Joe Chamber tune, don't think it got played much. This version is the one, really...

I was being somewhat provocative, because you could totally view this tune functionally or modally...or both. But maybe that's why it'd be great to analyze. See what you think, I think it's a killer tune.

I think it's a great idea and I am in...

Just one note aside...

We often find ii v I cadence in jazz!... but it does not always mean the tune is functional. .. to me The simplest sample of such an ambivalence is Satin Doll.... the A Section to me sounds modal only when it gets to final C chord it shows it is really functional... because it's form where functionality shows... it should some kind form cadence. Not just ii v.

Though the logics ii v' s here is borrowed from functional tonality... the way they are used is different...
Harmonic turnaround becomes kind of mode too...
If we play it for a bit longer without resolving to C we will get a modal harmonic groove with no need for resolution

?????????? ? ????? SM-G570F ????? Tapatalk

[ragman1]

You hear it unresolved I believe mostly because an ear is still waiting some functional resolution logics.

Well, that's a very good point. Do we hear it as unresolved because we're brought up on traditional harmony or is there something innate in us which senses it as unresolved?

I haven't quite worked that out (yet) :-)

Besides 'not going anywhere' you say.. what do you mean by 'going somewhere' in the context? This could be an answer...

Obviously we know when even a modal piece has stopped because it's reached the last note of the last chord and we know it. It's not as if it literally seems directionless and sort of suspended in space or something. But it's not the same sense of resolution as a ii-V-I provides.

[ragman1]

Mirrors, anyone?

Got the changes to that, Jeff? Or a lead sheet image? I can't find it online and I really haven't the time to sit here working it out.

[mr. beaumont]

Here's a simplified look at the chords. This is one where the ambiguity of certain voicings is important, but we can get to that later...

A) | C#-7 | Emaj7 | Amaj7 | Dmaj7 | (x2)

| Eb-7 | Ab-7 | Eb-7 | Ab-7 |


1. | Bmaj Emaj | Emaj | Amaj Dmaj |Dmaj |

| D- | G7 | F- | Bb7 | Ab- | Db7 |

|Bb- F- | F- | Ab- Eb- | Eb- |

2. C#7 F#7 | F#7 | C#7 F#7| F#7 |

|Bmaj Amaj | Amaj |


Someone with a better ear can go into more details (please)

[Jonah]

Well, that's a very good point. Do we hear it as unresolved because we're brought up on traditional harmony or is there something innate in us which senses it as unresolved?

I haven't quite worked that out (yet) :-)

It's more about philosophy and could worth a different thread... music is absolutely cultural thing.... to me it's enough to look 700 years back to see that nothing innate in us is there about what is resolution... it's all about culture in a very broad and complex sence.

Really interesting topic that I'd love to discuss in case you would start a thread.

[Jonah]

Here's a simplified look at the chords. This is one where the ambiguity of certain voicings is important, but we can get to that later...

A) | C#-7 | Emaj7 | Amaj7 | Dmaj7 | (x2)

| Eb-7 | Ab-7 | Eb-7 | Ab-7 |


1. | Bmaj Emaj | Emaj | Amaj Dmaj |Dmaj |

| D- | G7 | F- | Bb7 | Ab- | Db7 |

|Bb- F- | F- | Ab- Eb- | Eb- |

2. C#7 F#7 | F#7 | C#7 F#7| F#7 |

|Bmaj Amaj | Amaj |

Hm... I began to noodle around it a bit and got some different chords... I think because I started with melodies - counterpoint played by flute and trumpet

[mr. beaumont]

Post what you got-- I just followed the bass--this is very basic. If I'm actually playing the tune, I hear a lot of 9ths...but that doesn't affect my overall thinking, I guess.

I'd definitely like to hear/see what you have.

[Jonah]

| C#-7 | Emaj7 | Amaj7 | Dmaj7 |

This sounds like C#-7 Aeolian to me...

I'll explain why...

They definitely avoid #7 - especially the last chord which is maj7 instead of dom7 - this way they avoid dominant feel and harmonic minor cadence...
As for natural minor I do not believe it is really functional only together with harmonoc/melodi minor...

So I believe it's aeolian and it's modal...


The conection of cords is based much on voicing and common tones...
by the way i hear D# in Emaj7 in following Amaj7 (#11) - am I wrong?

The voices kind of flow half step up and down through the ch?nges

[Jonah]

[QUOTE]Post what you got-- I just followed the bass--this is very basic. If I'm actually playing the tune, I hear a lot of 9ths...but that doesn't affect my overall thinking, I guess.

I'd definitely like to hear/see what you have[/QUOTE

Very interesting actually i listened first with very poor audio and that's why I started melodies -- heard thme best... and I heard kind of C#-7 and Amaj7 with lots of extensions (which is actually close if you dont the bass clearly)...

But when you catch the bass it's different - it's gettig more split... to me it's also the sogn of modal form structure... in it's very important where voice is higher or lower for form... in functional tonality it would make that signficant difference

[Jonah]

If we put chords abstractly (without extensions even) we see that they contain lots of common tones and actually it is almost impossible to define a 'correct' voicing (as is with functional changes)... all voices have a few ways to move in the next chord (and if we add extension it's almost like one chord exchanging voices and only rythm and bass difine the change of harmonies).

[mr. beaumont]

Yeah, definitely. I think it's interesting if a play C# minor (Aeolian, heavy blues leaning, really ) on those 4 chords it works, and it floats a bit, and it all sounds like C# minor. Or if I address the Dmaj seperately I can make it sound like a temporary resolution...

So yeah, A section, just C#(Db) minor then up a step to Eb minor...Or you could play changes...now to transcribe some Freddie...

[p4chuss2]

Visualizing the Fretboard notes | Henry Robinett Guitar Lessons

I did this real quick. I hope it's germane still. I may have gotten off topic, I don't know. I always record my live lessons, so I was set it for it.

Many thanks Henry!! Amazing !! Thanks. Btw. I need to change my nick p4


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[henryrobinett]

Hey! Thank you. Sorry I messed up your name!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[p4chuss2]

Hey! Thank you. Sorry I messed up your name!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, no; no need to apologize at all. I really mean I need to change the nick.

Many thanks again. I have to admit that I listened to it a few times. The first time I was concentrated on what you were explaining. All the next times I was abducted by your voice and the music and felt asleep

Regards
Ric


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[Jonah]

eah, definitely. I think it's interesting if a play C# minor (Aeolian, heavy blues leaning, really ) on those 4 chords it works, and it floats a bit, and it all sounds like C# minor. Or if I address the Dmaj seperately I can make it sound like a temporary resolution...

So yeah, A section, just C#(Db) minor then up a step to Eb minor...Or you could play changes...now to transcribe some Freddie...

You see i always first analyze more like a composition (maybe a classical thing) - it's interesting for me to analyze how it works all together in original tune.... and only after that I go for looking tools to improvize (which sometimes can be different from first amalysis)..

Almost midnight here... I will try to come back to it tomorrow. very nice tune thanks for advising it.

[mr. beaumont]

You see i always first analyze more like a composition (maybe a classical thing) - it's interesting for me to analyze how it works all together in original tune.... and only after that I go for looking tools to improvize (which sometimes can be different from first amalysis)..

Almost midnight here... I will try to come back to it tomorrow. very nice tune thanks for advising it.

I think a full compositional analysis is important too...I suppose in jazz, the pulling apart has to be part of that too. But I have to remind myself to appreciate the whole more...I'm very quick to skeletalize everything.

[henryrobinett]

I don't do too much (any) analysis any more. Even as a composer myself. I just look at the chords and harmonic structure. And keep it simple


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mr. beaumont]

I don't do too much (any) analysis any more. Even as a composer myself. I just look at the chords and harmonic structure. And keep it simple


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good to know I'm not alone. Heck, I write charts these daus that just say major, minor, or "7."

[ragman1]

Here's a simplified look at the chords. This is one where the ambiguity of certain voicings is important, but we can get to that later...

A) | C#-7 | Emaj7 | Amaj7 | Dmaj7 | (x2)

| Eb-7 | Ab-7 | Eb-7 | Ab-7 |


1. | Bmaj Emaj | Emaj | Amaj Dmaj |Dmaj |

| D- | G7 | F- | Bb7 | Ab- | Db7 |

|Bb- F- | F- | Ab- Eb- | Eb- |

2. C#7 F#7 | F#7 | C#7 F#7| F#7 |

|Bmaj Amaj | Amaj |

Gee, are those MODAL chords????

sorry, couldn't resist :-)