-
the Miles/Evens tune,,Blue In Green is my template to experiment with .. a simple enough melody line that can be the jump point of various improv explorations..sure the MM is nice in minor flavored tunes..as is the diminished scale and all its embedded chord arpeggios and the tri tone scales and various inversions of min 6/9 and even 11..dom 13 13b9 ..major7#11 and others
try some augmented scale patterns..their major/minor mix works nice against a minor/major flavor chord..and of course the natural minor is not to be forgotten..it can be as powerful as any synthetic finger twisting "pool of notes"
-
07-08-2018 06:43 PM
-
damn man i can’t imagine someone trying to learn fundamental theory here. you’ll end up like that poor guy in the other thread who is leaning about whole steps and half steps per fret and all major scale modes together
-
Originally Posted by joe2758
sorry guys its that kind of a sunday...
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
In this very common convention for naming scale degrees - often with reference to chord of the moment - all "major" intervals or degrees are described with a plain number. They may be altered with a b or #, ...that's in countless jazz methods and books. Natural 5 is a thing. You don't mix 2 conventions at the same time. You wouldn't say b3 and then "minor 6th". That's pointless. Dorian has a natural 6, and natural minor has b6.
Are we going to actually ARGUE the fact that both have a b3? Or are we going to "rewrite" years of standard practice in casual jazz conversation among players and in teaching at ALL levels, by saying it CAN'T be that ...because it isn't altered from the parent scale?
Again, this kind of pedantic BS is what gives theory a bad name. It's okay to be wrong, and I guess it's also okay to be snarky and nitpicking. But when you do both at the same time, you're opening yourself up to ridicule. It's 2018. Every standard convention for conversing in jazz is acceptable.
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
-
Before I read this thread, I could play through a minor ii V i without difficulty.
Now I'm afraid to try <g>.
My only contribution is this:
A nat minor A B C D E F G
A dorian A B C D E F# G
A melmin A B C D E F# G#
A harmmin A B C D E F G#
So, every combination of the sixth and seventh degrees of the scales/modes.
If you can't figure out which to play in a given situation by ear, then you need more ear training.
If you can hear it, the names are of academic interest, if that.
At some point, I should learn the proper naming convention. I usually think of, say, a 6th, as based on the major scale. So it's F#. But, if you say "6th degree of natural minor", I know it's an F. If I had to use a number for it, I guess b6. Is that all correct?
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
In fact, any of them can work in a good enough line.
What strikes me as confusing is having four completely different names for varying two notes by a half step and then having a complex discussion of the chords to which the four named scales are applied.
The options are simple enough to enumerate and should be apparent to the ear.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
If it were my student I would probably spend some time getting them to practice resolving into the tonic triad, then the 6th, then 7 and 9.
-
Minor scales could be named numerically based on the 6 and 7.
If you have a tonic Cm, then you could say that the appropriate pool of notes would be Cminn6n7. That is, assume natural minor, because it's in the key signature (three flats in this case) and then call out what the 6 and 7 are going to be. n7 would refer to natural 7, or just shorten it to Cm67. That would tell you C D Eb F G A B. Cmelmin.
If you had a Cm7 heading to F7, you could say Cm6b7.
One of the most brilliant musicians I know refers to scales by the chord name, so G mixo is a G13 scale.
G7b9b13 isn't C harm min it's "Play a G7b9b13 scale".
I know that someone will point out various weaknesses in this approach -- but it makes it easier to comprehend things on the fly, and you could always rename things later.
The chord tones would be G B D F Ab Eb and you could put in the 11ths. There's your C harm min. That's 7 notes. You can pick the rest out by ear and maybe a few simple rules.
If you have either a b9 or a #9, usually, you can add in the other and you omit the nat9. That covers 9 notes so far.
If you have a b13, you'll probably omit the natural 13.
Since it's a 7th chord, you probably don't want the major 7.
The only note left is the #11. Use if you want an alt sound.
And, of course, when I say "omit", I mean go ahead and play them and make sure your line is strong enough so that they sound good.
So, you learn the notes in the various chords and scales and you learn the fretboard.
Or, you can learn it by Greek mode name and all the rest (and probably should at some point for the sake of communication). Learn patterns for each and apply them.
Sorry for the rant.Last edited by rpjazzguitar; 07-09-2018 at 03:34 PM.
-
Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacherOriginally Posted by Jazzstdnt
Anyway, I need to back pedal somewhat. Admittedly, a lot of this stuff isn't really nailed down tightly. Honestly, thinking about this yesterday, I WOULD have a problem with saying "natural 7" for maj7 for example. So, my end doesn't really hold up in that example. Touché for your side , and apologies.
I personally believe this is mostly to-do with the "problem" of chord symbols and 6th/7th chords in the first place.
Anyway, b7 seems to be clear and unambiguous in all situations. "7" is more problematic, depending on context: "play 7-1 on your V7 is less clear than "play b7-1 on..." or "play M7-1 on your V7". Honestly, letter names are probably simpler in that example.
I think 6 is more straightforward. 6 is M6 and b6 is b6. If you're making a DISTINCTION like Christian was, I think nat6 works for basic communication. With M6, I don't personally like the confusion of the fact that a m6 chord has a M6 in it. Just plain 6 or Nat6 is cleaner for me personally, in describing scale/chord degree (as opposed to the actual interval), but again, this is my own personal take . To each his own.
The other scale degrees seem to work cleanly without confusion. Flat, sharp, natural in front of any of them without problem . Even Bert Ligon, who is very very particular about this kind of thing, uses terms like natural 5 natural 9 in describing voice leading, but of course these don't have any real conflicts with chord symbol conventions either.
Anyway, I will try to be nice. All the best.
-
Glad you could take it good humour Jazzstudnt. I'd had a couple of beers and a bad gig last night (actually it was a perfectly OK gig, but I felt I played badly. Not just cos of the beers.)
Anyway, to pedantry:
Also the nomenclature of chords, itself confusing, is also similar to the correct nomenclature of intervals.
eg minor 6th interval, minor 6th chord (which doesn't, in fact, have the minor 6th interval in it)
In any case I always heard that jazzers/Americans used 'flat' or 'flatted' instead of the UK 'flattened' or academic classical terminology 'minor/major' for imperfect intervals and 'aug/dim' for perfect intervals.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
We are not talking dive bombs with Floyd Rose, are we?
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Kidding of course
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Originally Posted by VKat
In terms of - using yer branez - understand the distinction I make between this kind of thing - letting theory drive the musical decisions - as opposed to the massive amounts of thought and consideration that go into practicing music (but not actually playing it) using descriptive music theory and your ears.
(If you like my playing, you may listen to what I say, or you might think I'm shit and choose to ignore what I say.)
If I've learned anything over the years, the best way is always to use your ears and come to your own conclusions based on combining that with the application of the theory knowledge which is easily accessible to all of us these days.
Good luck!Last edited by christianm77; 07-09-2018 at 03:36 PM.
-
The confusion comes from the use of the word major to refer to a natural third, or, a natural seventh. And, same issue for the word minor. Also, 7 to mean b7 requiring that natural 7 be designated maj7
A different system might use b3 instead of min and b7 for dominant.
Cmin6 would be C-b36. It's one more character than Cm6, which is a slight disadvantage.
The hypen is there not to represent minor, but to make sure C(b3) is not read as Cb as the root.
C7b9 would be C-b7b9. Again more characters.
But, Cmaj7 would be C7 in my system.
Cmin7 would be C-b3b7
Cminmaj7 would be C-b37. Saves characters on that one. Unless you're doing Root m triangle 7.
In practice, I don't have a problem with the current system, but if we're talking about what is confusing to the beginner, there are a few things in the current system which qualify.
-
Screw all of youze guys. On the |F#min7b5| Balt7 |Emin |change in Autumn Leaves I play the flat 7. I'm jumping on a plane, coming over to Christian's house and playing 2 measures of frickin D over EMM7. And then on the Amin CM GM change I'm playing F. Nothing but F.
John
-
The system as it is encodes a lot of history.
For instance, the fact that it's the 'dominant' extended chords that are - C7, C9, C13 etc - as opposed to the major, tells you they were in use earlier in charts.
Chord symbols were adopted as they became necessary....
-
I think the word for the system as it has evolved is "kluge".
The Brazilians, by the way, do it differently.
Here are some examples.
C 7/4(9) (that slash is actually a horizontal line with the 7 above and the 4 below). Tells you that the F is in the middle of the chord. Bb7(9/#11), again that's a horizontal line.
G7M(#5) -- that's a major seventh #5.
So, apparently 7 is b7, but major 7 is 7M.
Bbm7M is Bbminmaj
In fact Cmaj7 is C7M.
Gminmaj7 is Gm(7M)
-
Speaking of alternative notation systems, French Grilles can start to look like modern art when the changes get more complex....
Anyway, Brazilian chord symbols for major, minor etc used to do my head in, but I find them OK now. But- I don't get the dominant chord notation... How does that work with the parentheses?
-
Please help me finally with the following so that I know that I didn't post this thread as a waste of time for you and myself.
It's a simple question.
- You decide to practice harmonically minor ii-V-i's (in cycles or not, whatever)
- You play your ii=m7b5 - V7(alt) - i=X
Please be concise, give me all most useful resolution chords in place of X. I'll start:
ii=m7b5 - V7(alt) - i=min7
ii=m7b5 - V7(alt) - i=min-Maj7
ii=m7b5 - V7(alt) - i=min6/9
ii=m7b5 - V7(alt) - i=Maj7
Did I miss anything useful in the fundamental category of chords? Which are your preferred resolutions?
Once again, I'd like to see what you'd use as your first option for your practice session. Enough of "theory".
-
Originally Posted by VKat
My advice on what to work on would depend on where you are at with your playing and listening. It sounds like you need to get used to the basic options.
Check out tunes, and look at the way the melody is related to the chords.
-
Fundamental = the triad.
Beyond that, m6, m7, minmaj7 for minor
Then
m6/9, m9, minmaj9
That'll do for starters.
But learn to hear all the notes over the basic triad. Again... Solos, tunes, listen listen. Relate to MUSIC.
Elias Prinz -- young talent from Munich
Yesterday, 10:24 PM in The Players