The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 142
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    In almost every conceptual example on minor ii-V soloing I see it's suggested that minor ii-V resolves to some kind of min-Maj chord or otherwise an implied min-Maj such as min 6/9 (with the natural 6 even without a 5th).
    Accordingly the melodic minor is suggested as a pool of notes for soloing over the resolution chord.

    When suggesting this generalization do educators draw on common Jazz practices which of course would not limit the resolution to a melodic minor friendly harmony but since it's so heavily emphasized I'd assume is a very common trend in the Jazz repertoire.

    Instead of asking this question I would better go through a plethora of standards to see it for myself but I'd like to give you an opportunity to help me on that.
    I may miss a common trend on reharmonization as well where min-Maj would be a desirable option instead of simple min.

    Of course other possible options are resolutions to simple minor and Major harmonies. I'm more interested in the former in which case the natural minor scale would be used for deriving phrases.

    So why does it have to be the melodic minor as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    When you say "a simple minor" do you mean a minor triad, or something like a minor 7 chord?

    So why does it have to be the melodic minor as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?
    Jazz musicians like 7th chords. So a minor triad is going to sound a little plain. Some people don't hear a minor 7 as a tonic chord, so you get minor 6 or minMaj7.

    I don't think it HAS to be one of these. I think it's just common practice and fashion(?).

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    I wrote a tune today with a minor iim7b5 - V+ - I minor triad cadence and it works perfectly. That said for these mini songs that I compose I do what I like as they are often tunes I make up in order to use what ever theory I have recently learned i.e. not for public consumption. The bottom line I guess is to use your ear and don't worry about what other people think. As the saying goes If it sounds good it is good.

    Sent from my MYA-L11 using Tapatalk

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by VKat
    So why does it have to be the melodic minor as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?
    It doesn't. I think you've happened upon specific methods that DO maybe.

    Some people use mm devices, like playing a different melodic minor mode over each of the 3 chords, as an illustration of possibilities of its use. But it's not a rule, and I certainly wouldn't necessarily think of it as being standard.

    What methods/teaching are you referring to?

    Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by VKat

    So why does it have to be the melodic minor as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?
    This is more about the tonic in minor than the II-V.


    1. As was said above, Mel. Minor needn't be the chord scale, unless you have a miMaj7, miMaj9, mi6, or mi6(9). No avoid notes with that scale source.

    2. If you have a Imi7 or Imi6, Dorian can be the chord scale, with avoid note of b7 for the Imi6 chord.

    3. If you have Imi7 you can also have Aeolian as the chord scale, with b6 as the avoid note.


    (BTW, it's OK to say "scale". One man's "pool of notes" is another man's scale, lol. It doesn't make one hipper to avoid the word. We needn't walk around on eggshells about using the term, as if it implies that we spend all day practicing scales up and down.)
    Last edited by Jazzstdnt; 07-06-2018 at 08:26 AM.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    What about, say, the minor 2-5-1 across bars 8 and 9 in a jazz blues? Temporary natural minor tonic sounds good there. MM can sound a bit too "fussy". Blues scale on the " i " can also be a good choice. In other instances I prefer Dorian to MM, the b7 doesn't irk me ...

  8. #7
    Just to clarify: I Googled soloing over ii-V-i in minor and almost in every example that poped up min-Maj7 was used as a chord of resolution in place of i and hence naturally Melodic minor was suggested as a scale (sorry I had to say a "pool of notes", I like it better) to solo over that min-Maj7 tonic.

    Then I actually went through a number of basic standard tunes using snippets of ii-V-i in minor (mostly in Major tunes as it's common to Jazz) and NONE of them used min-Maj7 in place of i. All examples used plain min or min7 which is basically the same thing.

    So that was the reason I asked my question: "...why does it have to be the melodic minor as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?" - which you can also read as:
    "...why does it have to be min-Maj7 as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?"

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by VKat
    Just to clarify: I Googled soloing over ii-V-i in minor and almost in every example that poped up min-Maj7 was used as a chord of resolution in place of i and hence naturally Melodic minor was suggested as a scale (sorry I had to say a "pool of notes", I like it better) to solo over that min-Maj7 tonic.

    Then I actually went through a number of basic standard tunes using snippets of ii-V-i in minor (mostly in Major tunes as it's common to Jazz) and NONE of them used min-Maj7 in place of i. All examples used plain min or min7 which is basically the same thing.

    So that was the reason I asked my question: "...why does it have to be the melodic minor as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?" - which you can also read as:
    "...why does it have to be min-Maj7 as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?"
    Min7 is not the same thing as min.

    Personally I think min7 is a bit of a
    weak sound for tonic minor but it can have its uses.

    In practice I never resolve to b7 on a minor chord anyway. 7 or 6, sure, or 9....

    Anyway, use yer ears, check out what your favourite players do and go from there. Don’t google answers about jazz because the internet is full of FLIPPING MORONS.

    On the other hand Dexter Gordon never told me no lies.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by VKat
    Just to clarify: I Googled soloing over ii-V-i in minor and almost in every example that poped up min-Maj7 was used as a chord of resolution in place of i and hence naturally Melodic minor was suggested as a scale (sorry I had to say a "pool of notes", I like it better) to solo over that min-Maj7 tonic.

    Then I actually went through a number of basic standard tunes using snippets of ii-V-i in minor (mostly in Major tunes as it's common to Jazz) and NONE of them used min-Maj7 in place of i. All examples used plain min or min7 which is basically the same thing.

    So that was the reason I asked my question: "...why does it have to be the melodic minor as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?" - which you can also read as:
    "...why does it have to be min-Maj7 as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?"
    Again, it doesn't. Here try this:

    Amazon.com: Voice Leading for Guitar Moving Through the Changes (BK/CD) (9780634016554): John Thomas: Books

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by VKat
    In almost every conceptual example on minor ii-V soloing I see it's suggested that minor ii-V resolves to some kind of min-Maj chord or otherwise an implied min-Maj such as min 6/9 (with the natural 6 even without a 5th).
    Accordingly the melodic minor is suggested as a pool of notes for soloing over the resolution chord.

    When suggesting this generalization do educators draw on common Jazz practices which of course would not limit the resolution to a melodic minor friendly harmony but since it's so heavily emphasized I'd assume is a very common trend in the Jazz repertoire.

    Instead of asking this question I would better go through a plethora of standards to see it for myself but I'd like to give you an opportunity to help me on that.
    I may miss a common trend on reharmonization as well where min-Maj would be a desirable option instead of simple min.

    Of course other possible options are resolutions to simple minor and Major harmonies. I'm more interested in the former in which case the natural minor scale would be used for deriving phrases.

    So why does it have to be the melodic minor as a basic go to example for min ii-V resolution?
    Use the natural minor over the whole progression, and when you encounter the V7, just add its third to the the pool of notes you are using. Over-using melodic minor scales makes you sound like a school kid


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Then resolve to nat 6

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Then resolve to nat 6
    Do you favour resolving to nat 6 over 1, b3 or 5 most of the time? Is that what Dexter does? From my limited analysis of players I like, I find more resolutions to 1, b3, 5 or 9 than to either of the 6ths and 7ths. Can you cite any fave players that resolve to nat 6 more often than not?

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Do you favour resolving to nat 6 over 1, b3 or 5 most of the time? Is that what Dexter does? From my limited analysis of players I like, I find more resolutions to 1, b3, 5 or 9 than to either of the 6ths and 7ths. Can you cite any fave players that resolve to nat 6 more often than not?
    You are being a bit literal about my mention of Dexter lol.

    Wes did it. Also Barry uses it as an example (Coleman Hawkins), loads of swing era examples of course. Sure I could think of more specific examples if my brain wasn’t melting.

    You can resolve to any of them notes, but it’s a good sound to get acquainted with because it’s not in the natural minor.

    It also equates Minor with IV dominant which is way useful for changes playing. Obviously for ii vs (scrapple for instance) but also:

    Relative minor = II7

    Resolution to 7 gets you 7#11, uncommon with ii but more of a thing with vi.

    So melodic minor on vi is big and clever, ii less so. Context is everything. Not all minor ii v s are equal.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    If bebop was a language it would be French .... idioms, idioms, idioms haha

  16. #15
    I see where you all (with a few exceptions) are coming from. When considering a point of resolution over the i(I) harmony for minor ii-V you suggest that the point of resolution is the definition of underlying harmony - right?
    So in that case your line defines the harmony, not vice versa. In other words improvised line is essential and the underlying harmony is secondary. Oh - I mean you wouldn't of course work against the harmony but you'd assume that what you play in your imptovisation defines the "rhythm section" harmonic behaviour.
    Yet in another words in this situation the lead player is the King and the rest shoud obey.

    Actually that's of course not true in the Real World and I somewhat exaggerated the role of a lead player. Besides in many situations the chosen "scale"... - here I must say why I don't like this term in the context of improvisation:
    - Scale is a good term for practicing patterns, scale goes strictly from the starting note up (down) to the end note and then back
    - A "pool of notes" (is it my personally coined term?), often referred to as a "pitch collection" has more flexible qualities
    ... the chosen "scale"... will satisfactorily work over closely related harmony.

    For instance, for min-Maj7, 1-b3-5-7, a plain old minor should work fine, especially when b7 will not fall on the strong beats.
    I mean all these talks about "scales over chords" are quite silly. It shouldn't be the main point of what to play over a given harmony.
    That's why I was calling a collection of pitches to draw from a "pool of notes". You have your basic tones intact and for the minor harmony that's obviously 1-b3-5 and what you add on top of it is governed by your taste, habits and ear.

    Regarding the 7th in a minor 'tonic' chord. Why in that situation is plain min triad much different from min7 ? When having min as the tonic, the 'i', an arrival point, we don't need the 7th to pull towards the 3rd of V as it happens in the 'ii-V' situation where that 7th is essential for a notorious forward motion. For the tonic 'i' the 7th is just again what is known in Jazz circles as a notorious "color tone". Besides for both min 1-b3-5 and min7 1-b3-5-b7 plain minor scale works perfectly equally well.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by VKat
    I see where you all (with a few exceptions) are coming from. When considering a point of resolution over the i(I) harmony for minor ii-V you suggest that the point of resolution is the definition of underlying harmony - right?
    So in that case your line defines the harmony, not vice versa. In other words improvised line is essential and the underlying harmony is secondary. Oh - I mean you wouldn't of course work against the harmony but you'd assume that what you play in your imptovisation defines the "rhythm section" harmonic behaviour.
    Yet in another words in this situation the lead player is the King and the rest shoud obey.

    Actually that's of course not true in the Real World and I somewhat exaggerated the role of a lead player. Besides in many situations the chosen "scale"... - here I must say why I don't like this term in the context of improvisation:
    - Scale is a good term for practicing patterns, scale goes strictly from the starting note up (down) to the end note and then back
    - A "pool of notes" (is it my personally coined term?), often referred to as a "pitch collection" has more flexible qualities
    ... the chosen "scale"... will satisfactorily work over closely related harmony.

    For instance, for min-Maj7, 1-b3-5-7, a plain old minor should work fine, especially when b7 will not fall on the strong beats.
    I mean all these talks about "scales over chords" are quite silly. It shouldn't be the main point of what to play over a given harmony.
    That's why I was calling a collection of pitches to draw from a "pool of notes". You have your basic tones intact and for the minor harmony that's obviously 1-b3-5 and what you add on top of it is governed by your taste, habits and ear.

    Regarding the 7th in a minor 'tonic' chord. Why in that situation is plain min triad much different from min7 ? When having min as the tonic, the 'i', an arrival point, we don't need the 7th to pull towards the 3rd of V as it happens in the 'ii-V' situation where that 7th is essential for a notorious forward motion. For the tonic 'i' the 7th is just again what is known in Jazz circles as a notorious "color tone". Besides for both min 1-b3-5 and min7 1-b3-5-b7 plain minor scale works perfectly equally well.
    I feel this is all far too much intellectualisation. Ultimately it shouldn’t matter what me, anyone else here, a google search, Barry Harris or the shade of Buddy Bolden himself has to offer on the matter.

    Try it. Does it sound good? Listen to the players you like - what do they tend to do?

    I think one big problem with the pedagogy of all of this is the dogmatic use of a seventh chord as a tonic minor chord. Then you have to choose minor 7th or minmaj7?

    In most cases it’s better to view minor as sixth or a triad and that offers more freedom to the soloist.

    Just don’t end up on b6. That’s like the 4 in a major key.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by VKat
    I see where you all (with a few exceptions) are coming from. When considering a point of resolution over the i(I) harmony for minor ii-V you suggest that the point of resolution is the definition of underlying harmony - right?
    So in that case your line defines the harmony, not vice versa. In other words improvised line is essential and the underlying harmony is secondary. Oh - I mean you wouldn't of course work against the harmony but you'd assume that what you play in your imptovisation defines the "rhythm section" harmonic behaviour.
    Yet in another words in this situation the lead player is the King and the rest shoud obey.

    Actually that's of course not true in the Real World and I somewhat exaggerated the role of a lead player. Besides in many situations the chosen "scale"... - here I must say why I don't like this term in the context of improvisation:
    - Scale is a good term for practicing patterns, scale goes strictly from the starting note up (down) to the end note and then back
    - A "pool of notes" (is it my personally coined term?), often referred to as a "pitch collection" has more flexible qualities
    ... the chosen "scale"... will satisfactorily work over closely related harmony.

    For instance, for min-Maj7, 1-b3-5-7, a plain old minor should work fine, especially when b7 will not fall on the strong beats.
    I mean all these talks about "scales over chords" are quite silly. It shouldn't be the main point of what to play over a given harmony.
    That's why I was calling a collection of pitches to draw from a "pool of notes". You have your basic tones intact and for the minor harmony that's obviously 1-b3-5 and what you add on top of it is governed by your taste, habits and ear.

    Regarding the 7th in a minor 'tonic' chord. Why in that situation is plain min triad much different from min7 ? When having min as the tonic, the 'i', an arrival point, we don't need the 7th to pull towards the 3rd of V as it happens in the 'ii-V' situation where that 7th is essential for a notorious forward motion. For the tonic 'i' the 7th is just again what is known in Jazz circles as a notorious "color tone". Besides for both min 1-b3-5 and min7 1-b3-5-b7 plain minor scale works perfectly equally well.
    Yes, except for the avoid note, right?

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Then resolve to nat 6

    Major 6th, right? There's no such thing as a Natural 6th. :0
    Last edited by Jazzstdnt; 07-08-2018 at 12:59 PM.

  20. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
    Major 6th, right? There's no such thing as a Natural 6th. :0
    Ok? But in that sense there's no such thing as a flat 3rd either? Or maybe you're mixing two different conventions.... 2018...

    Think everyone understands the meaning.

    Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    then again christian is the self proclaimed enharmnazi

  22. #21
    Diminished 5th, perfect 5th, augmented 5th.

    b5, nat5, #5. Probably more like b5, 5, #5, .... but nat.5 works and is a commonly excepted term of disambiguation.

    None of these are wrong. They are simply different conventions and describe slightly different things.

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
    Major 6th, right? There's no such thing as a Natural 6th. :0
    Ok but given you probably use dominant chord as a term for major minor seventh chords regardless of function, we could see how deep the pedant rabbit hole goes.

    Don’t even try it. I will bore you to death, without a thought.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=matt.guitarteacher;882480]

    commonly excepted term of disambiguation.

    QUOTE]

    is there a vaccine for this..Im sure my x-wife had it...

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77

    Don’t even try it. I will bore you to death, without a thought.
    i’m already bored

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Meh. When helping others learn theory it's important to use the accurate terms. Where fundamentals are concerned, they're well established. If the student is allowed/encouraged to mangle terms from the beginning it can be very difficult to be certain that they really understand what they're talking about - and they usually don't.

    So, whats the natural 6th in the natural minor scale, anyway? Is it different from the natural 6th in the melodic minor scale, or the harmonic minor scale, or the Dorian mode? Does natural 6th imply no sharp or flat symbol? What's an alternative to the natural 6th, an unnatural 6th? (all BS questions of course).


    My view is that beginners should learn the proper terms for intervals, scales, modes, chords, and chord symbol short hand. They can mangle things up with slang after they've mastered the fundamentals.