The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 53
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    Within any group of creative artists or musicians, there are a few who care more about the possibilities than the traditions. There is a certain small demographic who enjoys finding new ways to do things that sometimes fly in the face of the ways things have been done.
    I'm forming a small group within this forum, of the musically curious and restless, to participate in, redefine and create new ways of treating harmony within an existing harmonic framework (improvisation) or creating new compositions.
    I'm looking for those within the forum who want to participate (this not so much a lurkers' community because contributions and questions will drive the thread) and practice (these ideas won't happen or become realized without a lot of work.)
    Put aside your transcriptions, your conventional set of licks or the goal of just making the changes.
    In the end, I hope that I'll have a nice place to work with you and formulate and become proficient in ways to reharmonize pieces, re-assess our own assumptions of tertiary harmonies and make new guidelines to take your solos out of the changes and back in, with total control.

    If anyone would be up for a non judgemental take on possibilities, please weigh in and say a little about what appeals to you personally about this idea. If I get a critical mass here, I'll begin with some burning questions on the nature of improvisation and the role of alternative harmonies in the respectful balance of tonal harmony.

    Thanks to any of you who would be a part of this.
    David

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Great! Apart from: tradition/possibilities. Can I tick both boxes?

    Let's get started.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    My favorite start to a thread ever.

    Christian, I don't think David's actually proposing a dichotomy. I wouldn't be for it if he were.

    I have nothing to contribute, but these guys do: Worry Later | Ben Goldberg / BAG Production Records
    Last edited by omphalopsychos; 03-28-2018 at 02:55 PM.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    I think it might be an interesting dichotomy to discuss though... For example, how can the principles of bebop line construction be extended and subverted into something new?

    Anyway, something for another thread perhaps. I'm not sure from the OP how much this will be led by David or how much it will be driven by the participants.

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Well let's kick it off. Listen to that record I linked. I think that takes "soloing from the melody" to the extreme. It simultaneously upholds archaic traditions while subverting chord-scale orthodoxy as it relates to lines and even musical form.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by omphalopsychos
    Well let's kick it off. Listen to that record I linked. I think that takes "soloing from the melody" to the extreme. It simultaneously upholds archaic traditions while subverting chord-scale orthodoxy as it relates to lines and even musical form.
    Nice! I'm going to need to listen to this in a little depth:

    1) I really like Adam Levy, and I have been recommending his Sight Reading book for students - the examples could actually serve as a line dictionary and improvisational source book as well as simply sight reading material...

    2) Bassless trios with drums are cool, and practically encourage a more open style of improvisation.

    3) Just listened to Criss Cross. I really liked it.

    Anyway, I'll attach an example of something from my forthcoming album, which is in perhaps a not too far distant vein. For a few years I've been working towards a more contrapuntal, motivic style of improvisation with two string players... (Private link)

    Dropbox - 11 Honeysuckle Rose.m4a

    Not all the album sounds like this.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    That's great, Christian!

    I'm curious to know more about your approach. I talked to Adam about this record and he shared that they all worked together to assemble a common transcription of these Monk tunes. But they didn't assign chord symbols anywhere. In a sense, the harmony is incidental. Also I know that Ben Goldberg works in mysterious ways. From tune to tune, they worked off of different ideas that were not literal musical descriptions. An example Adam gave me was 'hot' vs 'cold', but I'm not sure they applied that specific metaphor anywhere in this record.

    If you don't know Ben Goldberg's music, I would recommend it for more listening as an example of non-dichotomous forward-thinking musicianship. He has serious chops in playing swing, bop, and klezmer. He's heavily influenced by Steve Lacy (just put out a Lacy tribute album in fact). I'm lucky he lives in my backyard (not literally), so I get to see him and many affiliated musicians play often.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    I am very interested in this, but I'm not sure what I have to contribute. I'm pretty clueless in this department, and I'm still struggling to master the more "traditional" stuff. I do like Christian's idea of trying to subvert bop language. I love stuff like that.

    I know David doesn't want a bunch of lurkers so I'll try to contribute where I can. Maybe I can serve as a blank canvas or something.

    One question I would definitely be interested in exploring, though, is how to work with some of this stuff in a group context where maybe the other people in the group aren't with it. Like a pickup group, or a jam session type thing. Is this something that definitely needs to be worked out and rehearsed (I mean in the absence of Tony Williams sized ears), or can it be worked in on the fly?

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by omphalopsychos
    That's great, Christian!

    I'm curious to know more about your approach
    Well, it's really based on something I've had a nerdy interest in for a long time which is imitative counterpoint.

    I was always interested in playing in a group which improvised contrapuntally and not over a pre-existing harmonic progression, with players deliberately imitating each other in a canonical way, developing motivic material from the melody.

    It's a sort of response to the 'blowing on changes' thing that lots jazz musicians do when they interpret any kind of classical music. I thought it would be more interesting to ape the process a little, but improvisationally.

    In the simplest approach this might mean players simply improvising in A minor and using their ears to listen to what the other players are doing to avoid doubling notes too much and aiming for resolutions and so against each other. Sometimes a player might take on more of a bass role, perhaps playing more of a chord progression with the other players, and sometimes the music might even fall into repetitive harmonic patterns.

    In any case it takes a lot of listening, and the ability to get out of the way quick. It's really fun, and in some ways it's not that dissimilar to just playing jazz.

    And of course the rules of counterpoint etc are somewhat relaxed here, although avoiding playing too much in unison or octaves with other players are a good idea.

    There is another a piece that uses this approach, and in fact it's become something we tend to do even around set chord progressions as a texture.

    In the piece I linked the tonality is obviously more modern/free tonal in the 20th century sense. The idea is that the usual swing reading of Honeysuckle Rose should crystallise and then disperse, maybe a few times in the performance. But the motivic material is all taken from the melody with not actually that much mucking around.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston Joe
    One question I would definitely be interested in exploring, though, is how to work with some of this stuff in a group context where maybe the other people in the group aren't with it. Like a pickup group, or a jam session type thing. Is this something that definitely needs to be worked out and rehearsed (I mean in the absence of Tony Williams sized ears), or can it be worked in on the fly?
    For me I need to work with the same people over and over. I don't think I've had more than about 2 or 3 rehearsals with my group, but we've played lots of gigs. And when we rehearse we just top and tailed written material, we never worked on improvisation that much.

    With pickup groups, it's difficult. With jam sessions, I think it's impossible. Nice stuff can happen, but there's a limit to how far you can go with it.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    For me I need to work with the same people over and over. I don't think I've had more than about 2 or 3 rehearsals with my group, but we've played lots of gigs. And when we rehearse we just top and tailed written material, we never worked on improvisation that much.

    With pickup groups, it's difficult. With jam sessions, I think it's impossible. Nice stuff can happen, but there's a limit to how far you can go with it.
    I think you're probably right. But maybe that's something that can be subverted too. Or maybe not. Like I said: tabula rasa here.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston Joe
    I think you're probably right. But maybe that's something that can be subverted too. Or maybe not. Like I said: tabula rasa here.
    In terms of your own playing - sure there is.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    But your harmonic options will be limited if there’s a pianist who isn’t listening.

    I mean if people are really listening anything’s possible. If people aren’t, nothings possible.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    But your harmonic options will be limited if there’s a pianist who isn’t listening.

    I mean if people are really listening anything’s possible. If people aren’t, nothings possible.
    It's not so much that he doesn't listen. He's just kind of set in his ways. He's been playing the same vanilla stuff for 50 years. He can hear me alter a change, but he can't necessarily follow.

    On the other hand, while he's the pianist I play with the most, he's not the only pianist I pay with. If this thread turns out to reveal something I really like, I'll find a way to use it. Maybe it'll involve having him lay out for a little while. I might need to duct tape mittens on him*, but it'll happen.

    *I can't do anything that would HURT his hands. He's a surgeon.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    ..
    Last edited by Reg; 04-02-2018 at 09:30 AM.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    I kinda want to start by asking you all how you look at a piece of music that you improvise on. I mean
    What inspires you to solo? What are you trying to do? Why?
    What can be played with? How far can you go out on any given tune with changes?
    What are the conventions you must respect and which things are fair game for reinterpretation?

    I know these will all be different for different people, and even, I know for myself, different for the situations I'm playing in. But by answering these questions, we will look at our own playing in a way that I dare say, is often not considered before you play with others, or for others.

    I listen to my share of free improvisational music, and I've observed that some of it is really transcendent, and some of it can be indulgent, and some of it is ...well, bullshit. Now I have these same observations about many genres of jazz/improvised music, about bebop, about swing, but with free improv I see the greatest potential for really inspired soloing and the greatest opportunity for the abuse of trust of the audience.

    The point is, in this thread, I want to openly talk about the reasons we solo, what we're trying to do, and why it works or not. If we know what we're going for, we can take great steps in shaping our own compositions when we solo.

    Rhythm, Melody, Harmony, Dynamics, Mood... are all things that are strongly suggested in a written piece we might play. Soloing over a piece means respecting the vehicle we're improvising/reshaping. For a large part, when there's an improvisation, it's considered a given or necessity that someone in the group or form "stays home" and minds the house. It's the elements of the form that give us a grounding.

    I'd like to know what you all think of when you solo, and what you consider the playing ground for improvisation.

    A little later in the weekend I'll start talking about how I think harmony functions and how we might re-interpret what the harmony of a piece is and still have a good relationship with the piece.

    Thanks for your participation!
    David

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    My ideas about this stuff are somewhat amorphous. And oddly (or maybe not) I'm less sure about it than I used to be. If you all would be kind enough to indulge me a little thinking out loud...

    When you have a conversation with someone - and in this case, I'm thinking a structured conversation, like a job interview - You're going to stick mainly to one topic, or a cluster of related topics (the nature of the job, the suitability of your background, etc). But there may be a significant digression. Perhaps you and your interviewer know some of the same people, so you talk about them for a while. But eventually you'll return to the topic of the job. I'd like to be able to do that musically.

    I can do it with modal fusion type stuff, and one-chord-vamp tunes like Passion Dance, but for standards with functional harmony, not so much.

    So here's where I have a pretty big break with David: I find most free jazz pretty much unlistenable. And while I might think it's interesting from an intellectual point of view for a duo stretch a standard to the breaking point, again, it's not something I actually want to listen to. So I want to be able to do this within the context of a tune, and without losing the groove, or the character of the tune.

    Does that make any sense? I'm trying not to have too much in the way of pre-conceived ideas about this.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Just wanted to say I'm in.

    Definitely one of the most interesting ideas for a thread here in a long time!

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    I find most free jazz pretty much unlistenable.
    Improvising freely, why not play within whatever sound language that you are drawn to.

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by bako
    Improvising freely, why not play within whatever sound language that you are drawn to.
    I said "unlistenable." Not "not fun to play".

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Ever hear a live Bill Frisell concert, the time he spends bringing a theme into play from nothing, even before the tune is recognizable? That's free jazz.
    Ever hear a Keith Jarret introduction to a standard? It can run from Bach counterpoint to Impressionistic to chordally profound. That's free jazz.
    If a performer fails to bring you into the process. If you can't hear the development and thought process that results in a complete interaction with musical and compositional content, that's free jazz with a failure somewhere along the way.
    If someone like Bill Evans began an improvisation, 40 percent of the audience heard a complete improvisational composition they wish they could take home and transpose/capture further and internalize, 20 percent of the audience heard pretty chords they enjoyed and 40% heard elevator music, his improvisation was maybe 60% successful.
    Is this a result of the performer, the performance, the genre or the perceiver? Good question. Something to think about.
    I heard Cecil Taylor on record, a lot of it was noisy, especially if I was dropped into the middle of a performance. I saw him live. From the beginning, to his development, his interaction with the bass player who I could tune out or listen with as I chose (much harder to listen in dimensions from a recording; which is why I say experience it LIVE).

    A good exploring improvisor takes chances and re-defines the toolset that others take for granted (or know nothing of, as the case may be) and a good soloists creates with integrity. That's why I wanted to open the discussion before we began with some concrete tools.
    Playing with a lexicon, expanding your own improvisational language is just a novelty if you can't apply it, and you can't apply it unless you have some philosophical reason besides "I like the way ***** does that, I'm gonna cop those licks."

    I respect each listener's desire and limitations. They grow as the engagement and spirit of knowing does. That's what I want to do here.

    David

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Yeah, okay. Maybe this isn't for me. I'm out.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    I look at a piece of music. I feel there's a lot I owe to each piece of music I set out to learn, reshape and play anew (improvise on). So answering my question, I look at a musical composition as a landscape. In free improvisation, I must be mindful to create an interesting terrain (change the tonality when it's a contrast is called for, aim for a peak in the episode and play to it, set up a change of texture with a hint of a modulation then bring it into being) and with a standard, I look for meaning in the composer's phrasing.
    The subtle modulations leading to THAT peak in the piece is the composer's path. I don't feel I need to match my footsteps to every step of the changes, but I must arrive on time and in that way hold the piece intact.
    Today I thought I'd look at devices of tension, or creating another path that lets you arrive with a story.
    Let's put aside key, diatonic and traditional harmonic language. Today it's the study of tension.

    The major triad is our starting point. Why? Because it's a structure that encapsulates the notion of resting consonance. It's based on the natural essential quality of the harmonic series. That's our given.
    Now that block of harmonic information can be changed by the interactions of other notes who's own overtone series works with, against or in a redefining way with that triad. These are our Triads over Bass Notes.

    Here is a list of perceived harmony clashes.

    For a triad, you can have a bass note that doubles the notes of the triad. Those are 1,3,5. Let's not use them for now. They'll be redundant.
    Now if we add the fourth note of the scale beneath, we get ... call it a triad over the 11? That's the most consonant.
    How about the sixth note of the scale, that's the 13th? That's the next consonant.
    Let's make a graded spectrum of triads over bass notes.

    Most consonant
    4
    6
    2
    -3
    b6
    b7
    major 7
    b2
    #4
    Most dissonant
    New constructs in modern harmony and form-screen-shot-2018-04-02-12-15-38-pm-png
    So now we have a set of triads over bass notes, each one distinct in the amount of tension each one packs.

    This is one triad possibility with a 513 second inversion closed position triad on the first 3 strings.
    Use this diagram to sound out the effects on you with these "tension structures".
    For now, see how that works.
    Next, we'll discuss how we can use these.
    Keep in mind, there are two more triads on the first three strings, and three triads on the 2,3,4 strings then spread triads.
    Remember when I said there'd be a bunch of work we'd have to do, new forms to learn? This is what I meant. I'll post more of the permutations if you don't do them yourselves.
    But that's the idea. Post your thoughts and observations!
    David

    Hint, look at the top voice of the triad as the melody note in a line. Instead of the given harmony, use a "tension structure" and increase or decrease tension. Then when you want to rejoin the harmony of a piece, voice the appropriate dominant chord and voila, you're back in the world of the familiar.
    You've taken a walk through the landscape and you've cut a new pathway through a piece.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston Joe
    Yeah, okay. Maybe this isn't for me. I'm out.
    Sorry. The thread will be here if you ever get to a curiosity place in the future.
    David

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by TruthHertz
    Sorry. The thread will be here if you ever get to a curiosity place in the future.
    David
    It's not a lack of curiosity.