The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 36
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    Just wondering...

    There's some sort of musical grammar that holds together bebop--it's the language of forward motion that was initiated by Bach.

    But, what to do about post bop vocabulary--specially modal vocabulary.

    What I mean is, bebop has a rhythmic foundation that classifies notes and note choice. Is the note on the beat and resolved, is it off the beat and pushing the line, is the note unresolved and pushing the beat (Chris'77 mentioned appoggiatura)? I'm simplifying here, but bebop has a rhythmically dependent vocabulary of tension and release.

    What does Modal have? How do I know how what notes should fall on which part of the beat? Is there a grammar?

    On modal tunes I've always tried to use a quasi-bebop approach mixed with the blues. But that's not all that Herbie, Wayne, Joe Henderson, Coltrane, all those post-bop-scha-bam players do.

    How does rhythm control note choice in modal playing--does my question make sense?

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Maybe modal jazz and later blues seem to craft lines with more focus to counterpoint, less to rhythm?

  4. #3
    like this:



    I definitely hear tension and release, but it works differently than bebop--at least to my ears. However, it's not random--move up a half step here, side slip there--it's more than "just use a bunch of pentatonics". There's a an architecture to modal lines somewhere, I just can't place my finger on it. Is is all counter point? How so?

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    That's not counterpoint, more like "the kitchen sink", the architecture is that the chords and lines are being played by the same person... so the randomness is correlated... (can you tell I don't care for it?)

  6. #5
    Do an advanced forum search
    username: Reg
    with terms: "modal" and "characteristic pitch"

    You might filter threads by numbers of replies , looking at threads with more conversation. There are a few really great old threads on this.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    Just wondering...

    There's some sort of musical grammar that holds together bebop--it's the language of forward motion that was initiated by Bach.

    But, what to do about post bop vocabulary--specially modal vocabulary.

    What I mean is, bebop has a rhythmic foundation that classifies notes and note choice. Is the note on the beat and resolved, is it off the beat and pushing the line, is the note unresolved and pushing the beat (Chris'77 mentioned appoggiatura)? I'm simplifying here, but bebop has a rhythmically dependent vocabulary of tension and release.

    What does Modal have? How do I know how what notes should fall on which part of the beat? Is there a grammar?

    On modal tunes I've always tried to use a quasi-bebop approach mixed with the blues. But that's not all that Herbie, Wayne, Joe Henderson, Coltrane, all those post-bop-scha-bam players do.

    How does rhythm control note choice in modal playing--does my question make sense?
    This is not a question that every occurred to me. I think I just play.

    You can certainly play modal jazz in a bop way of course. The obvious example of that is Cannonball. For instance his solo on Milestones:

    This is not modal jazz in any textbook sense. He essentially treats the vamp as an elongated ii-V-I. Note that he goes outside of the mode for the ii-V sound.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    like this:



    I definitely hear tension and release, but it works differently than bebop--at least to my ears. However, it's not random--move up a half step here, side slip there--it's more than "just use a bunch of pentatonics". There's a an architecture to modal lines somewhere, I just can't place my finger on it. Is is all counter point? How so?
    McCoy Tyner is another concept (at least here) - I think it took all the NYC pianists a decade to work out was going on ...

  9. #8
    I found a couple. Reg would actually really understand this--as he was one of the few over here at JGF that understood my obsession with phrasing as it related to single line playing and chordal accompaniment.

    What I am asking in this thread isn't about the notes, per say. Rather, I am interested in where to place the notes in relation to metric space--the time. Bebop has certain grammatical conventions concerning where notes are placed and how phrases are constructed. Charlie Parker, Sonny Stitt, and Bud Powell didn't always follow these conventions--that's where the improvisations got really exciting--but there was an underlying architecture that related rhythm to note to silence.

    I'm trying to figure out where to place my notes in a modal context. You can hear a keen sense of note placement in pro players--this is what separates pro from amateur even more than physical technique in my mind.

    Arpeggios are treated differently in modal playing, and wider intervals (I'm thinking Woody Shaw here)--but all that doesn't work quite right if you don't know where to place it in the measure, in the phrase, etc.

    I may not be communicating this quite right... let me know if my question makes sense.

    This question led my playing with more of the "hardbop stuff" I love to play these days. Blues scale, yes. Bebop, yes. But what makes Hard bop so, I dunno, infectious, is groove and attention to note placement--that's how I hear it. When I practice, I am super concerned with where my notes fall--even more than the notes themselves. As a result, I have a heck of a lot more rhythmic confidence and my lines "punch" more--less meandering--when I play out.

    This question of where instead of what is quite interesting, if you read into it a little

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    I found a couple. Reg would actually really understand this--as he was one of the few over here at JGF that understood my obsession with phrasing as it related to single line playing and chordal accompaniment.

    What I am asking in this thread isn't about the notes, per say. Rather, I am interested in where to place the notes in relation to metric space--the time. Bebop has certain grammatical conventions concerning where notes are placed and how phrases are constructed. Charlie Parker, Sonny Stitt, and Bud Powell didn't always follow these conventions--that's where the improvisations got really exciting--but there was an underlying architecture that related rhythm to note to silence.

    I'm trying to figure out where to place my notes in a modal context. You can hear a keen sense of note placement in pro players--this is what separates pro from amateur even more than physical technique in my mind.

    Arpeggios are treated differently in modal playing, and wider intervals (I'm thinking Woody Shaw here)--but all that doesn't work quite right if you don't know where to place it in the measure, in the phrase, etc.

    I may not be communicating this quite right... let me know if my question makes sense.
    I'm not convinced there's a whole lot of difference in some ways playing changes to modal tunes. My concept of playing bebop (influenced by Barry) is to chunk down the harmony to the point where it is as simple as possible and then add clusters of complexity afterwards.

    So, I think of a Dm II-V-I section as being a vamp in Dm over which I add harmonic embellishment as I wish, to take a simple example. Turnaround tunes like Rhythm Changes, Softly etc obviously invite this approach, probably more so than say Stella... So it's a spectrum from something like Passion Dance to a through composed standard like Stella.

    I think skilled changes players get out of chasing the written changes and start to lay their own shit on everything, learning how to resolve into chords at certain structural points in the solo. This is what you also need to do on a modal tune of course.

    I think this is what Reg does, for instance.

    I like the Steve Coleman concept 'invisible paths' - and looking at the McCoy Tyner solo, that really describes it well.

  11. #10
    All good, but... you are all missing my question.

    There's a ton of stuff in books and on the internet about what scales to use, what pentatonics, what substitutions.

    That wasn't at all what I was asking.

    This is frustrating, not because of everyone's responses to my OP, but because I can't communicate this correctly

    I'm talking about looking at 2 measures of blank staff paper, or 4 measures of blank staff paper, or 8 measures (a lot of modal phrases seem to be 8 measure gigantic phrases. Not that all 8 measures are chalk full of notes, but that the phrase finally resolves at the end of the 8)

    Okay, we're looking at the 8 measures of time--follow me (?)--we have all these melodic materials (pentatonics built on varying degrees of the scale, quartile harmony, whole tone, diminished, augmented--the whole kitchen sink). Now (and here is the question), where do we place these notes in relation to time, the pulse that is pushing the tune forward?

    I have tried the whole "chord tone on strong beats" thing that I've used as a basis for bebop (I don't use it all the time, but it's in the back of my head--Chris'77, I know that's a gross simplification, but it's just a comparison), but that frame of mind doesn't work with true modal vocabulary. Sure, you can play bebop over modal. Look at my man, Mr. Cannooooonball, and Pat Martino--just for starters. But I'm talking about the real deal get a big meal players of modal. I'm talking about Joe Henderson, Herbie Hancock, Wayne Shorter, Miles (to some extent), Coltrane, Chick-a-dee, McCoy, Freddie Hubcap, all them and more. It's a more complex relationship between note and placement in the measure. It's both free and structured in it's rhythmic foundation. Sometimes it sounds like African drumming with pitches, more so than bebop (which is incredibly rhythmic) or swing.

    There's poly rhythms, odd groupings, metric modulations... mind twisters for sure. But how do the notes figure into all of this rhythm?

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    All good, but... you are all missing my question.

    There's a ton of stuff in books and on the internet about what scales to use, what pentatonics, what substitutions.

    That wasn't at all what I was asking.

    This is frustrating, not because of everyone's responses to my OP, but because I can't communicate this correctly

    I'm talking about looking at 2 measures of blank staff paper, or 4 measures of blank staff paper, or 8 measures (a lot of modal phrases seem to be 8 measure gigantic phrases. Not that all 8 measures are chalk full of notes, but that the phrase finally resolves at the end of the 8)

    Okay, we're looking at the 8 measures of time--follow me (?)--we have all these melodic materials (pentatonics built on varying degrees of the scale, quartile harmony, whole tone, diminished, augmented--the whole kitchen sink). Now (and here is the question), where do we place these notes in relation to time, the pulse that is pushing the tune forward?

    I have tried the whole "chord tone on strong beats" thing that I've used as a basis for bebop (I don't use it all the time, but it's in the back of my head--Chris'77, I know that's a gross simplification, but it's just a comparison), but that frame of mind doesn't work with true modal vocabulary. Sure, you can play bebop over modal. Look at my man, Mr. Cannooooonball, and Pat Martino--just for starters. But I'm talking about the real deal get a big meal players of modal. I'm talking about Joe Henderson, Herbie Hancock, Wayne Shorter, Miles (to some extent), Coltrane, Chick-a-dee, McCoy, Freddie Hubcap, all them and more. It's a more complex relationship between note and placement in the measure. It's both free and structured in it's rhythmic foundation. Sometimes it sounds like African drumming with pitches, more so than bebop (which is incredibly rhythmic) or swing.

    There's poly rhythms, odd groupings, metric modulations... mind twisters for sure. But how do the notes figure into all of this rhythm?
    Dunno, let us know when you work it out :-)

  13. #12
    Ugh!

    I ask the weirdest questions.

    Speaking of questions, did you all listen to the You'll Hear It podcast on Space/Silence? That's the episode where I submitted a question. Once you get through the...well, I'll let you find it--it's worth a listen. I put the video on the Journal of Performance Ear Training.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Sometimes it sounds like African drumming with pitches
    The form of a bebop tune or a standard has a different set of harmonic
    appointments to keep. Passion Dance improvisation is seemingly based
    on an open vamp, however it is possibly not a coincidence that McCoy's
    solo is structured around 8 bar sections or 4 chorus of the 32 bar song form.
    I like your description above and I would add that it is also very motivic.
    His tension/resolution thing always sounds clear.

  15. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    I found a couple. Reg would actually really understand this--as he was one of the few over here at JGF that understood my obsession with phrasing as it related to single line playing and chordal accompaniment.

    What I am asking in this thread isn't about the notes, per say. Rather, I am interested in where to place the notes in relation to metric space--the time. Bebop has certain grammatical conventions concerning where notes are placed and how phrases are constructed. Charlie Parker, Sonny Stitt, and Bud Powell didn't always follow these conventions--that's where the improvisations got really exciting--but there was an underlying architecture that related rhythm to note to silence.

    I'm trying to figure out where to place my notes in a modal context. You can hear a keen sense of note placement in pro players--this is what separates pro from amateur even more than physical technique in my mind.

    Arpeggios are treated differently in modal playing, and wider intervals (I'm thinking Woody Shaw here)--but all that doesn't work quite right if you don't know where to place it in the measure, in the phrase, etc.

    I may not be communicating this quite right... let me know if my question makes sense.

    This question led my playing with more of the "hardbop stuff" I love to play these days. Blues scale, yes. Bebop, yes. But what makes Hard bop so, I dunno, infectious, is groove and attention to note placement--that's how I hear it. When I practice, I am super concerned with where my notes fall--even more than the notes themselves. As a result, I have a heck of a lot more rhythmic confidence and my lines "punch" more--less meandering--when I play out.

    This question of where instead of what is quite interesting, if you read into it a little
    Yeah. that's why I mentioned reg and characteristic pitch. Has a lot to do with where as much as when. Traditional functional tunes have you targeting thirds and sevenths a lot, especially tritones etc. Third's resolving to sevenths etc.

    Modal is about deemphasizing them to varying degrees, depending on the effect you're looking for. Anyway, characteristic pitch serves the function of establishing cadence and tension/release etc. I am completely talkingout of my arse on this, but that's what was discussed on those threads by players who could someone follow .

    Cadence , establishing tonal targets outside of traditional voice leading etc. all have implications for WHERE and WHEN as much as note sets. He did a lot of stuff with playing modal style in functional tunes . There are videos. It's pretty interesting, once you get to the point of looking into it.

  16. #15
    Bert Ligon has a whole analysis of multiple players solos from Kind of Blue tunes in vol 2 of his theory book. Worth the purchase just for that. Miles's solo on So What is more about motific development than a true modal "note set" approach.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    I think John Abercrombie might've had the answer : "Improvising on changes is about playing a straight line through a circle. Modal improvisation is about playing a circle around a straight line." Something like that anyway...

    Might be relevant to what you're calling grammar. Might not. In any case, just wanted to share since I think it's about the hippest thing I've ever heard.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    Ugh!

    I ask the weirdest questions.
    No you ask really good questions, I just don't think they can be pithily answered on an internet forum. You have to ask McCoy etc, so to speak.

    I was taking a look at that Passion Dance solo, will share my thoughts when I have any.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ccroft
    I think John Abercrombie might've had the answer : "Improvising on changes is about playing a straight line through a circle. Modal improvisation is about playing a circle around a straight line." Something like that anyway...

    Might be relevant to what you're calling grammar. Might not. In any case, just wanted to share since I think it's about the hippest thing I've ever heard.
    I would say changes playing it's like finding a straight line on a circle and then putting other circles on it, and sometimes triangles and pentagons too.

    Modal's easier because you already have the straight line laid out for you.

    However, it's not really, because in a standard you have more landmarks and harmonically significant moments. And probably a tune people can hum. And so on.

    In Modal music, I guess you have to invent the song, because there's not one there. Miles was very good at writing hooky modal tunes though. Passion dance has a hook too, but you are talking about a much smaller amount of motivic material, shorter melodies, and so on.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Funny thing about jazz is that players often "understand" what to play but they actually want to "feel" it while playing. One thing that is easy to understand but not so easy to feel until you master it (at least for me) is playing lines. By playing lines you don't seek for targeting, chasing the changes etc, because lines have their own ways. You can compress them, expand and do all sort of different things. But, you have to master them, have a large number of lines under your fingers that you can play without thinking of them. Peter Farrell showed me how to create gazillion of lines on the fly without thinking of "how to create" but of "how to use". So, it would be great to have major, harmonic minor, melodic minor, domdim etc lines under your fingers in different positions.
    Lines are used in bebop and modal. When you compress or expand lines all of the sudden you play, for example 5 notes line fitting it in one beat or beat and half. These things happens almost unconscious because you are chasing rhythmically the song. Another thing Peter showed me is how to create practice and put in use giant lines.
    When I'm listening to great players I always hear lines and they don't play them rhythmically the same every time because they are fitting them in different context. With lines you have rhythmical freedom.
    My 2 cents...

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mikostep
    Funny thing about jazz is that players often "understand" what to play but they actually want to "feel" it while playing. One thing that is easy to understand but not so easy to feel until you master it (at least for me) is playing lines. By playing lines you don't seek for targeting, chasing the changes etc, because lines have their own ways. You can compress them, expand and do all sort of different things. But, you have to master them, have a large number of lines under your fingers that you can play without thinking of them. Peter Farrell showed me how to create gazillion of lines on the fly without thinking of "how to create" but of "how to use". So, it would be great to have major, harmonic minor, melodic minor, domdim etc lines under your fingers in different positions.
    Lines are used in bebop and modal. When you compress or expand lines all of the sudden you play, for example 5 notes line fitting it in one beat or beat and half. These things happens almost unconscious because you are chasing rhythmically the song. Another thing Peter showed me is how to create practice and put in use giant lines.
    When I'm listening to great players I always hear lines and they don't play them rhythmically the same every time because they are fitting them in different context. With lines you have rhythmical freedom.
    My 2 cents...
    This is how it works with me I think.

    If it’s not working it’s usually because that unconsciousness isn’t there

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I would say changes playing it's like finding a straight line on a circle and then putting other circles on it, and sometimes triangles and pentagons too. Modal's easier because you already have the straight line laid out for you.
    I understand John's quote more on a gut level. This kind of thing quickly falls apart when you try to explain or expand on it, but I'll give it a go anyway.

    Playing a straight line through a circle: the circle of repeating chords is the structure and the straight line is your solo. When playing on changes I'm trying to find things that keep developing through the structure, tying things together while moving ahead. Without that forward direction it's just running the changes like a computer. I think one of the clearest EG's is Oliver Nelson's solo on Moments Notice. He takes a very simple motif and works it through the chord structure step by step, expanding and developing chorus by chorus. It's very easy to see the circle and the straight line. Playing a circle over a circle is probably going to be pretty monotonous.

    Playing a circle around a straight line: the straight line is the groove. It just keeps going and doesn't repeat in the same way a circle of changes does. The circle is your solo revolving around that. You create the structure, and reprise and develop ideas around that forward motion. Hopefully the other guys hear your intent and work those structures with you. Playing a straight line over a straight line is probably going to be pretty monotonous.

    Both kinds of playing need tension and release. With changes there's already something there in the existing structure. In modal you have to create that from the ground up so to speak.

    Maybe what you describe... hanging triangles and such... maybe that's the grammar? It sounds like work. Maybe there isn't the same kind of grammar in modal playing. Maybe you have to develop it on the fly with the other players. And maybe it takes a different kind of talent to do it well.

    BTW: I don't think you can find a straight line on a circle. That's gonna give you nothing but trouble :-)

  23. #22
    In basic geometry, you can create a line segment--or if you're really adventurous--a ray that extends into infinity.

    ...I taught remedial geometry for a year--hardest year of teaching in my life

    What I was talking about was the differences within the architecture of the line--bebop verses modal.

    In bebop contexts, you are outlining a chord by manipulating the pulse--strong beat weak beat--forward motion.

    When you listen to the OG modal players of jazz (I ain't talking Gregoorre--annnn chants) they utilize line structure that seems to skate about this strong beat weak beat Bach-ian forward motion principle of the pulse dictating the line. You start hearing arpeggios that extend to the upper reaches of the chord structure. You start hearing angular 4ths. You start hearing really odd groupings becoming common place, like quintuplets, and septuplets. You can play traditional bop lines and super impose different changes to imply more motion. Or you can create motion with linear vocabulary that goes beyond bebop--because the music evolved beyond bebop.

    Let's put it this way. You can tell an early intermediate player, "okay--for the ii, play dorian. For the V, play mixolydian. For the I, play Ionian." Okay, student comes back. She says "I tried that formula at a jam and it didn't sound like jazz". Then you say, "okay, I want you to start transcribing some more jazz. Start off with some Scott Hamilton--you'd be surprised what you can learn up line construction from a guy like Scott Hamilton". She comes back, you give her another musician. You tell her, "I want you to pay attention to where the chord tones lie"

    There's the point I'm talking about. When we talk modal, we often talk about all these scales and super impositions. We hardly talk about how these "new" note choices relate to the rhythmic landscape. Kind of Blue modal Miles is easier to figure out. But Herbie? Wayne? There's a relationship with the notes and where they are placed in the measure.

    Here, let's get interesting on another level. Sorry Miles, we're talking McCoy Tyner's comping. Ever notice how McCoy created these dramatic harmonic landscapes for JC to solo over. Those weren't just random fourth voicings played within the key. McCoy--if you listen to his comping closely--can create drama by building these long 8 bar phrases of accompaniment--all within the "static" landscape of the modal section of the tune. Yes, he used substitutions, yes he used chromatic-ism. Tell a pianist to just comp in fourths and he or she won't sound convincing. Tell a pianist to use substitutions to "play a straight line through a circle" and he or she won't sound convincing.

    Teach that pianist how McCoy shaped his accompaniment by building 2,4,8, and 16 bar phrases--and graph out where the drama happens in each phrase? For an 8 bar phrase, is the movement climaxing right at the end of the 8th measure of the phrase? What substitutions create the drama at that point in the phrase?

    I call this phraseology--but I'm not the first one to speak of this phenomena by far. I tried to created a podcast on this very topic, but I got scared of copyright infringement with song use.

    Why did I take a detour with McCoy's comping? Well, he was using all of these fourth voicings, pedal points, substitutions--with in a rhythmic context of a phrase.

    I am interested in how Herbie Hancock, Joe Henderson, Wayne Shorter (can we add Woody Shaw to this short list) use this vocabulary of fourths, subs, symmetry, within the rhythmic context of a phrase--where do the notes lie within the phrase. The placement of the note within the context of the measure is more important than the note on it's own.

    Let's take Wayne Shorter and his love affair with pentatonic melodic vocab. Tell me to just use a pentatonic from the b7th of the base harmony, or from the 5th. Great! But where do those notes fall? Is there a logic to line building in modal like their is a logic to line building in bop? I'm not going to accept that Wayne was just using his pentatonic vocabulary and randomly spurting the notes across the measure.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Is this modal jazz?


  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Also Wynton has a bit of post modern fun in the solo section of this killer Jelly Roll tune in the sax solo



    I love the way it all goes post-Miles and the banjo keeps going haha

    But yeah, vamp solo sections and so on can be traced back to the early days. And that Django tune shares a ground plan with So What - just in the major key. Django of course plays his Django language.

    So it's clear vamps (and modes too) have always been a part of the jazz vernacular. It's suspect just a lot of the people who developed the histories we take for granted didn't really know the earlier music (obviously the trad/modernist split) and just assumed everything pre-1959 was blowing on functional changes. Wynton is an important figure here of course, and I like the way he gives a cheeky wink in that recording. Ans people accuse him of purism....

    But "what do you play on a vamp?" is just as pressing a concern for someone playing early or gypsy jazz as it is for someone playing McCoy Tyner tunes. The solution is of course different, but the same can be said for changes playing. Modern players might employ pentatonic cells, chord scales, US triads and other techniques not used by the bebop generation and so on.

    In the same way middle Eastern music is much more accurately 'modal' and the logic of that music is not based on harmony at all. So that's another way to play again, one that's very fascinating to me.

    The other thing is that vamps obviously can mean not only but tight, short repeating harmonic figures and riffs as well as isolated chords (that stuff predates jazz by hundreds of years, baroque music is full of vamp based music.) A good example is a 1 6 2 5 turnaround, or various forms of 1-4-1 which were very popular in the swing era (Rhythm Changes itself is a combination of the two.) The problem is essentially the same. A modern jazz musician might abstract the harmony somewhat. I mean, I'm not even talking about the post modal players here - don't know what Sonny Clarke is doing on Second Balcony Jump, but he's not playing the changes, and Dexter takes a very generalised view of the A section, using blues, Lester style language, bop and even 1-2-3-5 pentatonic cells.

    And jazz players of the swing to bop era always favoured these vamp tunes, or things like Honeysuckle Rose or Topsy with a relatively slow rate of harmonic change, for jamming on. Really the Moment's Notice/Giant Steps thing was quite at odds with Parker's approach to soloing, and it's interesting that Coltrane took those cycles and applied them to - guess what? - Modal vamps.

    So - to sum up... Jazz has always had a tendency towards the modal - by which we can think essentially oriented around tonalities rather than playing correct notes on every chord - I think if you are thinking of modal jazz as a separate problem to playing a lot of the core jazz repertoire you've missed a trick. People get too caught up in the chord symbols, even some really good players. For all that Barry Harris might abhor modal jazz, his approach is always to simplify the changes and focus on generating complexity from the artful use of SCALES.

    On the other hand our conceptual idea of what modal jazz is affecting our understanding of the music. Obviously the best modal players are not playing the same concept as the beginners jazz class noodling through Little Sunflower for the first time. The reality of Miles's late 50s music - which was only the start of this - is much more complex.

    At the same time jazz language has obviously generally progressed and changed, and playing on harmonically open, non functional progressions seemed to really help the post-Miles guys get away from feeling they were in a straight jacket. But, you want to be able to play your shit in all situations.
    Last edited by christianm77; 06-16-2019 at 05:51 AM.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87
    In basic geometry, you can create a line segment--or if you're really adventurous--a ray that extends into infinity.

    ...I taught remedial geometry for a year--hardest year of teaching in my life

    What I was talking about was the differences within the architecture of the line--bebop verses modal.

    In bebop contexts, you are outlining a chord by manipulating the pulse--strong beat weak beat--forward motion.

    When you listen to the OG modal players of jazz (I ain't talking Gregoorre--annnn chants) they utilize line structure that seems to skate about this strong beat weak beat Bach-ian forward motion principle of the pulse dictating the line. You start hearing arpeggios that extend to the upper reaches of the chord structure. You start hearing angular 4ths. You start hearing really odd groupings becoming common place, like quintuplets, and septuplets. You can play traditional bop lines and super impose different changes to imply more motion. Or you can create motion with linear vocabulary that goes beyond bebop--because the music evolved beyond bebop.

    Let's put it this way. You can tell an early intermediate player, "okay--for the ii, play dorian. For the V, play mixolydian. For the I, play Ionian." Okay, student comes back. She says "I tried that formula at a jam and it didn't sound like jazz". Then you say, "okay, I want you to start transcribing some more jazz. Start off with some Scott Hamilton--you'd be surprised what you can learn up line construction from a guy like Scott Hamilton". She comes back, you give her another musician. You tell her, "I want you to pay attention to where the chord tones lie"

    There's the point I'm talking about. When we talk modal, we often talk about all these scales and super impositions. We hardly talk about how these "new" note choices relate to the rhythmic landscape. Kind of Blue modal Miles is easier to figure out. But Herbie? Wayne? There's a relationship with the notes and where they are placed in the measure.

    Here, let's get interesting on another level. Sorry Miles, we're talking McCoy Tyner's comping. Ever notice how McCoy created these dramatic harmonic landscapes for JC to solo over. Those weren't just random fourth voicings played within the key. McCoy--if you listen to his comping closely--can create drama by building these long 8 bar phrases of accompaniment--all within the "static" landscape of the modal section of the tune. Yes, he used substitutions, yes he used chromatic-ism. Tell a pianist to just comp in fourths and he or she won't sound convincing. Tell a pianist to use substitutions to "play a straight line through a circle" and he or she won't sound convincing.

    Teach that pianist how McCoy shaped his accompaniment by building 2,4,8, and 16 bar phrases--and graph out where the drama happens in each phrase? For an 8 bar phrase, is the movement climaxing right at the end of the 8th measure of the phrase? What substitutions create the drama at that point in the phrase?

    I call this phraseology--but I'm not the first one to speak of this phenomena by far. I tried to created a podcast on this very topic, but I got scared of copyright infringement with song use.

    Why did I take a detour with McCoy's comping? Well, he was using all of these fourth voicings, pedal points, substitutions--with in a rhythmic context of a phrase.

    I am interested in how Herbie Hancock, Joe Henderson, Wayne Shorter (can we add Woody Shaw to this short list) use this vocabulary of fourths, subs, symmetry, within the rhythmic context of a phrase--where do the notes lie within the phrase. The placement of the note within the context of the measure is more important than the note on it's own.

    Let's take Wayne Shorter and his love affair with pentatonic melodic vocab. Tell me to just use a pentatonic from the b7th of the base harmony, or from the 5th. Great! But where do those notes fall? Is there a logic to line building in modal like their is a logic to line building in bop? I'm not going to accept that Wayne was just using his pentatonic vocabulary and randomly spurting the notes across the measure.
    As is often the case with your posts, I'm not quite sure who you are addressing this comment to.

    My comments are somewhat in parallel to yours, because I can't honestly answer your questions. But that's not because I think they aren't good questions, the opposite in fact. Furthermore if someone can answer them, the language might not be immediately accessible.

    For instance, I can imagine Reg would have something to say, but I probably wouldn't understand his answer. I think sometimes you have to walk the path, which for me usually means listening and imitating what I hear on a non-analytical level to start off with.

    McCoy was one of the first jazz musicians I really dug. I always felt his use of side-slip planing is a dominant aspect of his sound, and something it's fairly easy to imitate on a guitar on an intuitive level, which is generally how I do it especially when playing with a post Coltrane style sax player like the one in my Quartet. It is a rhythmic thing.

    Which is not say that a more analytical approach wouldn't be useful or of interest.