What is considered the standard way to look at extensions in terms of arpeggios?

[christianm77]

So, it's 7#11, alt or b9b13.

Well, I guess that was your point, more or less, but I needed to translate it into my internal language.

Yeah I think so....

It's all empirical, so to speak, from what I have looked at which is mostly common practice post war jazz.... Things I haven't looked at much include Bill Evans and Monk, so I reckon there's more stuff there harmonically before we even get into the post-modal era proper.

Altered scale is a tricky one re: that common practice era. It doesn't come up much, by which I mean the only 'smoking gun' example of the altered scale I can find in bop (so far) is the run on the B section of Conception (Shearing) - that's a really nice example.

Everything else seems to be a little ambiguous with the tritone sub mixolydian. Barry Harris doesn't teach melodic minor harmony, so I've tended to go with him in ignoring the scale by and large for bop language (not for more modern stuff) but you CAN interpret some lines that way.

But there's not much in it.

Db7 scale : Db Eb F Gb Ab Bb Cb
G altered: Db Eb F G Ab Ab Cb

The ONLY difference is whether or not you are happy to have an Gb on a G7 scale. CST with its preoccupations with COM eliminates that from the basic options even though the theory would leave space for it. Hans Groiner-like, it seeks to tidy up jazz.

OTOH I don't worry about those mode books ;-) The records are the textbooks. **** everything else. The records led me to appropriate theory (and Barry), not vice versa.

You don't learn to speak a language from a grammar book, and bop, like French, is all idioms....

[rpjazzguitar]

Yeah I think so....

Db7 scale : Db Eb F Gb Ab Bb Cb
G altered: Db Eb F G Ab Ab Cb

....

Major scales and melodic minor scales contain the same notes, except one. There. I said it, even though it goes without saying. Take a major scale and lower the third and you get MM on the same root. Take a major scale and raise the root and you get the IIMM.

So, to my cumbersome way of thinking, Db7 scale is fifth degree of Gb major.

Galtered is Abmelmin ... which is one note away from Gb major.

Given that I think this way, you can't blame me for preferring madd9 a half step up or sharp the 4.

BTW, I appreciate the historic perspective on this stuff. I find it interesting, although I've never had the patience to figure it all out.

Sometimes, this theory feels like scratching something you shouldn't scratch. You can't resist it, but it's not a good idea.

[christianm77]

Dominant scale is useful to think about as a separate entity to major.

Why?

Well only 6 of the 7 major notes sound good on major, but all of them can act as part of a dominant ‘ii-v’ phrase.

Resolving dominant phrase in forward motion into target chords is kind of the basic bop technique, creates a lot of the swing. The Wes solo has many example of this. Therefore the dominant chord naturally has more importance than major, minor.

You want to let the dominant dominate.

Of course Wes plays on the other chords, but it’s the resolutions between chords where the interesting stuff happens.

Play the movement, not the chords, so to speak

[christianm77]

I also play the melodic minor shit as well.... But the bop thing disciplines the ear to hear FORWARDS not UP.

Now I hear altered scale as a series of resolutions waiting to happen, not necessarily an articulation of the V7b5 whatever sound.

All of which would seem to contradict what I said earlier lol.... But I think that's why I can hear the 7b5 as a resolving chord but not a quality in itself.

It's not the 'right' way to hear (as if there could be such) but it's something I prefer in players - that sense of forward motion.

I don't know for sure (because I still can't quite decode what he is saying) but I think Reg hears something like this.... He certainly sounds like it to me when he plays. His use of language in his posts - tonal targets etc - seems to imply this type of hearing.

I think some forms of pitch selection - intervallic CST, triadic work can (not necessarily) tend towards a static-ness of effect and lack of swing. I know this sound when I hear it and I tend not to like it. There are ways to make it swing, though.

In bop I think the swing is in built to the harmony, the two things aren't separate as they are often taught. An obvious example is just enclosure notes and so on..... They are like unaccented strokes on a hand drum....

[christianm77]

Anyway not entirely sure what that has to do with anything, but just riffing. :-)

[matt.guitarteacher]

I don't know for sure (because I still can't quite decode what he is saying) but I think Reg hears something like this.... He certainly sounds like it to me when he plays. His use of language in his posts - tonal targets etc - seems to imply this type of hearing.

Absolutely. 100%

[p1p]

There's so much here that I've skipped over, so my apologies if I've missed something.

Just wanted to mention that I've had, and still do practice the sh*t out of fundamentals (scales, arpeggios, chord tones etc..) in various ways. The more you do it - get the sounds into your head and under your fingers - the more the 'fancy substitutions'/extensions just become part of the sound, or another option. It's easy to get ahead of yourself with the theory and trying to relate it to what's being played by your favourite players. I have to remind myself constantly - baby steps. It works for me anyway.

[rpjazzguitar]

I also play the melodic minor shit as well.... But the bop thing disciplines the ear to hear FORWARDS not UP.

Now I hear altered scale as a series of resolutions waiting to happen, not necessarily an articulation of the V7b5 whatever sound.

All of which would seem to contradict what I said earlier lol.... But I think that's why I can hear the 7b5 as a resolving chord but not a quality in itself..

7b5 is used in different ways. In One Note Samba it's clearly a transitional chord.

But, in baiao (NE Brazilian music) it has the quality of a tonic and the improvisors often lean on the lyd dom scale.

I hear it the same way most do, apparently, which is as an option over dominants that aren't resolving immediately to a tonic. Another way of saying it would be that I hear xx4554 as a sub for xx4555, but not leading to Gmaj.

I hear the alt scale, more or less, the way I hear Dm7 Db9/G7 C69. That is, sort of hearing the notes of Db9 over G7. The whole thing has a suspended quality, meaning it's kind of desperate for resolution.

I have heard at least one great player talk about moving towards a target, with the implication that you can go anywhere you want along the way, as long as you hit the target. I think that's more or less correct, but, like everything else in jazz, some people do it better than others.

[christianm77]

7#11 is not the same thing as 7b5 at all.

[starjasmine]

i'm talking about music theory, not fingerings. since it's been quite a while since conservatory i did a bit of googling.

I studied jazz arranging as part of my jazz degree. It's perfectly fine to have b9 and #9 in a chord; likewise, b5 or +5 (or all of these alterations) can be in one chord. The "why" can be traced back to diminished harmony, whole tone harmony, and some other ways, too.

G7alt is an unspecific chord symbol since it does not tell us which note(s) to alter and which way. but it does not mean that every note must to be altered both ways.

I think we are agreeing here. As I learned it, writing G7alt is giving the player license to play whatever alterations he or she feels are appropriate. OTOH, if you want a specific chord, then you write that. For example if you want a G7#11, you write G7#11, not G7alt.

[znerken]

This is outside my competence. According to the other author he uses F#-7 B7 F-7 Bb7 E-7 here.

I think I found a few errors in the other authors tab though. How is the timing tabbed out? Tried my best to catch beats, but really had to slow it down to catch that rambling.


The bit over E-7 is just a Gmajor arpeggio isn't it? Then two scale tones?


So I initially thought like this:

Of course you can just as easily look at it as D mixo. But there is a #11 on an important beat.

[christianm77]

I think I covered that bit above? I don't hear the E in bar 8. I think the pitch at the end of the bar should be an Ab.

The timing is difficult to get right here...

Wes is playing over what would normally be a B7 chord - a chord approaching the Em (II) chord. So he outlines this chromatic sideslip thing towards Em7. I see:

F#m9 with an added passing tone (G#) between A and F#.
Fm11 arpeggio where the first Ab isn't articulated cleanly rather than left out intentionally
Em11 without the E (so also Gmaj9)

But yeah it's just all on the II chords of that chromatic II-V thing:
F#-7 B7 F-7 Bb7 E-7

[znerken]

I think I covered that bit above? I don't hear the E in bar 8. I think the pitch at the end of the bar should be an Ab.

The timing is difficult to get right here...

Wes is playing over what would normally be a B7 chord - a chord approaching the Em (II) chord. So he outlines this chromatic sideslip thing towards Em7. I see:

F#m9 with an added passing tone (F#) between A and G#.
Fm11 arpeggio where the first Ab isn't articulated cleanly rather than left out intentionally
Em11 without the E (so also Gmaj9)

But yeah it's just all on the II chords of that chromatic II-V thing:
F#-7 B7 F-7 Bb7 E-7

Nah, it’s just similar, but I just wrote it out, so it’s new :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[znerken]

I have another challenge for you Christian, and others.

The trumpet solo, that starts at 2:40, where do I recognise all those licks from? I know I have heard a lot of them before. Especially the the first 20 seconds. Is it Parker? I think I'll try and learn that solo sometime. What kind of scales are you hearing?

[znerken]

By the way Christian. I have been listening to more Emily Remler talks/tapes from students. She always plays melodic minor over dominants, no matter what. The reason for this is the reusability of her licks. So an altered lick can be reused, non altered, by not going up a half step, but up to the fifth of the dominant. You probably know this, just wanted to air out what I discovered in her talks.

[grahambop]

I have another challenge for you Christian, and others.

The trumpet solo, that starts at 2:40, where do I recognise all those licks from? I know I have heard a lot of them before. Especially the the first 20 seconds. Is it Parker? I think I'll try and learn that solo sometime. What kind of scales are you hearing?

To me it sounds more like Blue-Note era trumpeters like Lee Morgan or Donald Byrd.

[Jonah]

By the way Christian. I have been listening to more Emily Remler talks/tapes from students. She always plays melodic minor over dominants, no matter what. The reason for this is the reusability of her licks. So an altered lick can be reused, non altered, by not going up a half step, but up to the fifth of the dominant. You probably know this, just wanted to air out what I discovered in her talks.

John Stowell in his video explains somewhat similar application of MM. 1 step below, 5th above etc.

I am not much into such approaches but I practiced and incorporated it finally.

It is fun to associate the specific scale with specific alteration/extension.

Though it is also limiting in some strange sense. I mean one should really here it connected with scale musically to make it convincing.

[grahambop]

If I recall Emily’s video correctly, one specific reason she uses the melodic minor on the fifth of the dominant is to get the b5 note into her lines in that context. She says this is very characteristic of people like Wes and she really wants to get that note, I think she describes it as ‘spicing up’ the sound or something like that.

[rpjazzguitar]

I think of it this way (among other approaches).

Start with a G7 scale, aka G Mixo.

Now, figure you can use #11, 5, #5, b9, 9 and #9.

Pick one or more of these choices and insert/substitute them into the G7 scale. Lots of possible combinations and a lot of them have names.

Say you put in the altered ninths instead of the 9 and you leave the 5 intact. That's F MM.

Put in the #11 (and remove the 4) and it's D MM. If you take that, add the #5 and both altered 9s, it's Abmelmin.

And so forth.

That's what Emily is accomplishing with her approach, although apparently, like most, she used a subset.

So, learn the sound of the various alterations. You can learn all the scale names or you can use chord names. Apparently,these days most people like the scale names, but there are great players who think of, and teach, the chord names.

[Jonah]

I think of it this way (among other approaches).

Start with a G7 scale, aka G Mixo.

Now, figure you can use #11, 5, #5, b9, 9 and #9.

Pick one or more of these choices and insert/substitute them into the G7 scale. Lots of possible combinations and a lot of them have names.

Say you put in the altered ninths instead of the 9 and you leave the 5 intact. That's F MM.

Put in the #11 (and remove the 4) and it's D MM. If you take that, add the #5 and both altered 9s, it's Abmelmin.

And so forth.

That's what Emily is accomplishing with her approach, although apparently, like most, she used a subset.

So, learn the sound of the various alterations. You can learn all the scale names or you can use chord names. Apparently,these days most people like the scale names, but there are great players who think of, and teach, the chord names.

The thing is that musically specific alteration should have specific musical 'meaning' in the language... then it will make sense... not only know and hear it but discern it as different expressive meanings...

And this is not always like that... there are many cases when alteration has more general meaning

And second point... this conception may seem a bit artificial.

After all there is nothing that prevents one from just playing #5 and b9 within dom chord arp if he wants... however simplistic it sounds... after all this is what it sounds like... it does not sound like MM some steps above ... even when melody is much sepaated from harmonic background one should have really perversed ear to hear real melodic minor sound in dom chord in functional context.. you just hear alterations.

This approach leads partly to 'learn the conception and then see what happens'... which may be fun though musically it should be the other way around...


In my opinion basic principle of any theory is that it should be described the way it actually sounds. You use and describe music... not some tools for tools to make other tools work...

[znerken]

I didn't really intend for this to be a discussion, but it is of course welcome.


Anyway, Emily did not use modes at all, and therefor she just used what she coined "jazz minor". Of course, they are in their own way a mode, either lydian dominant, or super locrian.

I stress that the whole point behind her thinking, was that she had TWO places she could play jazz minor, a 5th string root, and a 6th string root position. Therefor she had tons of licks in those two positions, many stolen from Wes. If the dominant resolved, she went up jazz minor half a step, if not, from the 5th of the chord. Now, this gives either lydian dominant, or super locrian.


So altered scale, or mixolydian with a #11... Basically. The whole idea here is simplicity and reusability. You play the EXACT same lick over either dominant, but it will either be altered, or mixolydian with a #11. So yes, she always played jazz minor over dominants, and nothing else.

[christianm77]

By the way Christian. I have been listening to more Emily Remler talks/tapes from students. She always plays melodic minor over dominants, no matter what. The reason for this is the reusability of her licks. So an altered lick can be reused, non altered, by not going up a half step, but up to the fifth of the dominant. You probably know this, just wanted to air out what I discovered in her talks.

No, I don't really know this because I haven't studied ER very much, so I'm not that familiar with her process.

Makes sense and is quite similar to my own approach (although I would interchange melodic minor and dorian because that's what I hear Wes and others doing)... The reusability of lines and licks is an important concept for me. You don't want to be a chump, make the most out of the material you know. Get hip to the fact that Dm6, G7 and Bm7b5 are sides of the same coin... I learned that from Charlie Christian...

You know, ER was all about the practicality.

[christianm77]

I think rpjazzguitar has slightly missed the point... To slightly rephrase what znerken is talking about, ER was entirely working with what Mick Goodrick calls derivative thinking, not parallel thinking. The advantage of this is the reusability of licks and lines without changing fingerings once a few are known. I work similarly... I suspect this is the more traditional approach.

(Thing is go back to, say, the 1930s and it's incredibly common to hear jazz musicians playing minor triads, m6 arps and minor scales (including dorian and melodic minor) up a fifth on dominant 7th chords... I doubt the term 'Lydian Dominant' had even been coined at this point. Anyway that is by the by.)

I think Jordan makes an interesting point that is probably beyond the scope of the thread. I don't know if I agree with him....

In most cases it doesn't matter what the musician heard when they played a line, that's unknowable. Emily may have been hearing G altered, who knows? But her playing process mentally was, Ab melodic minor on G7, then practice a gazillion times until its intuitive. I don't think it really matters.

My gut feeling was that ER wouldn't have given much of a shit.

Speaking for myself I tend to hear the line in isolation against the rhythm section. I get a lot of people asking for backing chords when I demo lines on my videos, while I don't really see the point.... I don't think I hear vertically like that at all when I transcribe other people's lines... I'll go - oh this is a B triad with a #4 against a F7 chord. Because Klemons has fucked with my head the F sounds dissonant lol.

[pauln]

I have another challenge for you Christian, and others.

The trumpet solo, that starts at 2:40, where do I recognise all those licks from? I know I have heard a lot of them before. Especially the the first 20 seconds. Is it Parker? I think I'll try and learn that solo sometime. What kind of scales are you hearing?

Compare the trumpet solo at 2:15...

[christianm77]

I have another challenge for you Christian, and others.

The trumpet solo, that starts at 2:40, where do I recognise all those licks from? I know I have heard a lot of them before. Especially the the first 20 seconds. Is it Parker? I think I'll try and learn that solo sometime. What kind of scales are you hearing?

I think the first phrase might be a quote of a Fats Waller tune, Black and Blue.