The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Posts 51 to 75 of 135
  1. #51

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I haven’t heard him do that either. I thought you might have found a solo....

    Dim chords of course don’t necessarily have anything to do with the diminished scale. I suspect the dim scale use in jazz started with LNT embellishment of the arpeggio.



    Well it’s more likely with Chico that he is coming from that place as he is part of the current paradigm. Btw Here’s a nice example of melodic minor usage I found jn one of his solos:

    Good video. It looks to me, though, that an average player (which Chico is decidedly not) would probably have been thinking tritone sub with the root of the original chord (the high D) and the rest being, mostly, an Ab major lick. Ablyddom, Ebmelmin if you like, but, for many of us, it's probably easier to find that Ab major triad and embellish it.

    So, this strikes me as one of those cases where something catches your ear, you figure it out, and the device that the player seems to have been using is a familiar one. What is less familiar, is the quality of the melodic content, the quality of his time and the absolute clarity with which each of his notes rings out.

    You're probably familiar with his song Triades which includes a lot of split triads making an incredible musical statement. If you haven't heard it, I think it's on youtube and is worth checking out.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #52

    User Info Menu

    Nica's Dream was released in 1954
    || Bb- maj7 | Ab- maj7 | etc..
    Wayne Shorter, Joe Henderson, and Herbie Hancock, to name a few, also liked to compose borrowing from the modes of melodic minor. I don't see that there could be any controversy over the modes of melodic minor 50 years after the fact.

  4. #53
    As far as history, Reg contends that it was a BANDSTAND evolution and not an academic-only one. He played this stuff in the sixties when HM minor was the thing.

    Then, the tradition of including the #9 as an 8th pitch to HM became a thing. At that point, it's not a huge leap to the NEXT step of using MM as the 7-note evolution of that idea. There are a lot of players and teachers who to talk about using it. It's widely considered the 2nd most important scale for improv.

    At a certain level, I guess I have to just decide whether this account by someone who played in the 60s is accurate or whether they're just making it up or something. The way we continue to go on about these things feels a little bit like we think the Gary Burton's and reg's of the world are just making this stuff up , contributing to some kind of flat earth or fake moon landing -type conspiracy or something.

    Of course all of those horn players and keyboardists who talk about MM being important are in on it as well.

    Whatever.
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 07-09-2019 at 11:22 PM.

  5. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    As far as history, Reg contends that it was a BANDSTAND evolution and not an academic-only one. He played this stuff in the sixties when HM minor was the thing.

    Then, the tradition of including the #9 as an 8th pitch to HM became a thing. At that point, it's not a huge leap to the NEXT step of using MM as the 7-note evolution of that idea. There are a lot of players and teachers who to talk about using it. It's widely considered the 2nd most important scale for improv. ...
    Indeed, it is considered to be very important, which is why I have doubts about turning my back on it! I suppose it could be a bit like a Swing era player (or earlier) refusing to play b5ths in defiance of "those filthy modernists", he'd be missing out on a lot of fun, but it's a choice, perhaps a very brave choice given that he would definitely have been perceived as uncool at the time. I expect that people like Reg, and perhaps yourself in a similar way may consider MM organisation to be de rigeur, but maybe I'm seeing it quite differently to how it would have evolved on the street. I mean, I love LD and altered Dominants, but I just happen to feel that modes of MM are just optional ways of addressing them, and not necessarily more important than say, HW dim scales or whole tones etc..

    So maybe I'm closing the door on what the cats did with it all after 1965, but perhaps I can live with that, I mean, I expect it will take the rest of my playing life to catch up to what my favourite cats were doing in 1963 ! But feel free to remind me of all the fun I'll be missing ...

  6. #55

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Good video. It looks to me, though, that an average player (which Chico is decidedly not) would probably have been thinking tritone sub with the root of the original chord (the high D) and the rest being, mostly, an Ab major lick. Ablyddom, Ebmelmin if you like, but, for many of us, it's probably easier to find that Ab major triad and embellish it.

    So, this strikes me as one of those cases where something catches your ear, you figure it out, and the device that the player seems to have been using is a familiar one. What is less familiar, is the quality of the melodic content, the quality of his time and the absolute clarity with which each of his notes rings out.

    You're probably familiar with his song Triades which includes a lot of split triads making an incredible musical statement. If you haven't heard it, I think it's on youtube and is worth checking out.
    Aye



    I think you’ve seen this and already critiqued my pronunciation of ‘Traides’ iirc?

  7. #56

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Indeed, it is considered to be very important, which is why I have doubts about turning my back on it! I suppose it could be a bit like a Swing era player (or earlier) refusing to play b5ths in defiance of "those filthy modernists", he'd be missing out on a lot of fun, but it's a choice, perhaps a very brave choice given that he would definitely have been perceived as uncool at the time. I expect that people like Reg, and perhaps yourself in a similar way may consider MM organisation to be de rigeur, but maybe I'm seeing it quite differently to how it would have evolved on the street. I mean, I love LD and altered Dominants, but I just happen to feel that modes of MM are just optional ways of addressing them, and not necessarily more important than say, HW dim scales or whole tones etc..

    So maybe I'm closing the door on what the cats did with it all after 1965, but perhaps I can live with that, I mean, I expect it will take the rest of my playing life to catch up to what my favourite cats were doing in 1963 ! But feel free to remind me of all the fun I'll be missing ...
    I like the word 'optional' here. You could be a great Grant Green style player and never go near a MM scale, for instance.

    In practical terms, all jazz players, I think, have to have a way of dealing with m6. That's an interesting and useful sound because it gives us the m7b5, the m6 (obv!), the 9th chord, and a half step above the dominant that 7b9b13 sound (by the way, interesting fact - Abm6 is present in the D harmonic minor scale through enharmony.)

    Now the fact that it's a short step to build a melodic minor scale around the m6 leads me to be surprised that you wouldn't do that (Barry Harris rather doesn't, for instance, using the m6-dim instead.) But most players of the 30s - 60s favoured I have studied favoured mixed scale usage, usually the 7 in ascent, the b7 in descent. You hear this in Charlie Christian etc.

    To take the opposite case, Miles's solo on So What mixes the scales too, even though it's obstensibly based around the dorian mode. I remember being struck by that when I was learning the solo as a baby jazzer who had just encountered the modes and CST.



    The C# in bar 14 could be a LNT of course (it's on the '4 and'), but either way the leading tone C#-->D makes for better melodic flow and swing.

    From a more philosophical standpoint, it's fair to say the MM and its modes has a ghost, if not overt, presence in the history of jazz - to take a very old fashioned example, here is Stephan Grappelli on Limehouse Blues, what do you hear on the C7 chord (the first four bars of his solo)?



    It's a similar example to the George Shearing. Just flat the third of the key and there you are, a LD on IV7, or an altered scale on VII7. Does that mean he was 'using' the melodic minor?

    Same sort of question - did Django use Harmonic Major harmony in 'Manoir de Mes Reves.'?

    I don't know. Christian van Hemert objected on these forums to my saying this. Technically it's true - but no gypsy player would think of it that way. His argument I think, is if it's not how the player thinks, it's not valid, and I have some sympathy for that viewpoint, but I'm not a mind reader when it comes to the greats of the past.

    OTOH I remember Reg arguing that Django wasn't using it on the basis that it hadn't been invented yet (so - what does 'invented' mean here?) He also argued that first chord is Bbo7, even though there is clearly an F# in the melody in the violin, and every gypsy player plays 6 x 5 6 7 x (the song is in D.) I tend to think of it as a Bbo7 with an F# on, somewhat influenced by Reg, but Van Hemert was pretty adamant that no Manouche player he had met (and he's met a lot more than me) thinks of it that way. either. (It's a colourful A7 chord, not a Bbo7)

    All these answers can be true. There's a difference between playing something and 'knowing' what you are doing: arguably Django did not use the harmonic major in that sense, because he lacked the language to talk about it. He wasn't self aware of it in the way Miles was, or most of these forum members are. He didn't have a 'concept', so to speak - well he probably did, but he obviously didn't write a Mel Bay book or whatever. The importance of having a communicable concept encourage us towards seeing music theory - including Melodic Minor harmony - as a social phenomenon rather than something immanent in the music itself.

    Which in English means, you can take it or leave it.

    OTOH, one's analysis of a music always comes through the prism of your understanding, because that analysis is always ambiguous. Therefore 'the words of a dead man are modified in the guts of the living.'

    Tl;DR - you can find melodic minor modes in jazz from the early days to the present. But
    1) when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail
    and 2) the question I think prince is interested in is not what we can find in the music, but rather when musicians started self-consciously using MM modes, and therefore if that type of thinking is that helpful for the type of music he wants to play.
    Last edited by christianm77; 07-10-2019 at 04:19 AM.

  8. #57

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    As far as history, Reg contends that it was a BANDSTAND evolution and not an academic-only one. He played this stuff in the sixties when HM minor was the thing.

    Then, the tradition of including the #9 as an 8th pitch to HM became a thing. At that point, it's not a huge leap to the NEXT step of using MM as the 7-note evolution of that idea. There are a lot of players and teachers who to talk about using it. It's widely considered the 2nd most important scale for improv.
    I'd just like to point out Reg's timeline chimes with my hunch.

    At a certain level, I guess I have to just decide whether this account by someone who played in the 60s is accurate or whether they're just making it up or something. The way we continue to go on about these things feels a little bit like we think the Gary Burton's and reg's of the world are just making this stuff up , contributing to some kind of flat earth or fake moon landing -type conspiracy or something.

    Of course all of those horn players and keyboardists who talk about MM being important are in on it as well.

    Whatever.
    Well, you know, we are just rebelling against the boomers now... Also you are a filthy globist.

    Actually in seriousness, there's a social context..

    Again, I would relate to the social aspect. Gary Burton was innovating jazz rock in the 60s, obviously, going beyond standards. (Many of the teachers in the UK were part of a specific movement in jazz that turned away from US models in the 80s and so on.) Bear in mind by the 1960s the whole history of changes based jazz had pretty much happened, and Burton et al were looking for something new.

    And this CST stuff, it kind of tries to extend a hegemony - 'this is the way we play jazz now.' Is that a fact? Does Tim Berne play jazz that way?

    I'm sure Tim knows all the CST and MM modes there are... But you know I am not arguing against learning about them. I think Prince's word 'option' is important here. Ignorance isn't cool. A musician should learn all the options they can, but the thing that selects which are useful, is in my experience, listening and that's an emotional connection. You aren't going to get that in a Jazz Harmony 101 lecture theatre.

    I know a lot of players who regard the harmony teaching they received at college as pretty useless and unhelpful. Those are the players who are tuning into Barry Harris etc.

    It's a style. I know CST wonks like to say it's a theory of harmony, but it leads to a ****ing style. I can hear it a mile off. The jazz edu international style.
    Last edited by christianm77; 07-10-2019 at 04:49 AM.

  9. #58

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Aye



    I think you’ve seen this and already critiqued my pronunciation of ‘Traides’ iirc?
    Don't recall that, but that doesn't rule it out.

    What surprises me about Triades is that it seems to be much easier to play fingerstyle, but, he picks it.
    Also, from the chart, it looks like a kind of classical piece, but live, it's a high energy burner.

    On a separate, but possibly related topic, have you seen Irrequieto?

    I'm wondering what you have to practice to think of a line like that one.

  10. #59

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    And that’s why I think we need to draw attention to the problem that jazz has become obsessed with chord symbols. It’s not the scales that are the problem- they are great sounds - it’s the imperative to use them.
    Maestro, just recently you were "keen to be non value judgmental about it".

    Below is an example of the kind of horrendous simplification that I see too often and that is a poor representation of the actual composition. (I have no idea of what Mingus' original score looked like, but these simple chords don't make the music justice.)


    Now, Compare to this:



    Melodic Minor is just a tool. We don't need it to make music, but it's neat to make theory comply with reality (in those rare situations this would be of importance to somebody).

  11. #60

    User Info Menu

    Ok Jcat I tried! I tried!!! But it’s so hard haha.

  12. #61

    User Info Menu

    Ultimately I think it boils down to the individual player's relationship to the music at hand and what he thinks is his role;

    If I view myself as a "lead guitarist" with a purpose to run scales over a series of chords, (maybe I never learned to play chords because I think my guitar is a horn), that harmony is the responsibility of someone else to provide support for my soloing; or

    If I see my role as the provider of harmony and to what extent this is supposed to be improvised or a formalized part of the music structure.

    Also, If I know the music by heart, If I have had time to study the changes or if I'm supposed to sight-read. Most of the time I would have the opportunity to adjust the changes and make the kind of simplifications that serve my purpose. I think that's the responsibility of the player, not the composer/arranger.

    If I get your point, it serves no purpose to write overly complicated, I shall do my best.
    Last edited by JCat; 07-10-2019 at 07:49 AM.

  13. #62

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Don't recall that, but that doesn't rule it out.

    What surprises me about Triades is that it seems to be much easier to play fingerstyle, but, he picks it.
    Well most plectrum players , even quite a few pros, have poor string crossing technique so this kind of thing is MUCH more intimidating than shred licks or whatever.... It's not too hard to fix though.

    I don't actually find Triades is difficult to play at Chico's tempo on that youtube vid, which is dotted quarter = 116 (assuming it's written in 3/8 or 6/8.) I did it just now without warming up.

    The tell tale is if you see your hand moving in and out over the strings to try and avoid them (there is a way of making this work, but I don't use it neither does Chico as far as I can tell). Bad/over dogmatic alternate picking pedagogy is usually to blame.

    I got an instant gain in string skipping speed as a side benefit of rest stroke picking (even though Gypsy players don't use it this way). It's counterintuitive but playing consecutive downward rest strokes facilitates string skipping a lot better than alternate free strokes. It's all to do with being able to escape the plane of the strings on the upstroke.

    Notice Chico picks it DDU. Lage Lund also uses this combination for arpeggios. And lots of Bluegrass guys and girls whose MO could be summed up as 'it'd be easier fingerpicked' haha.*

    (Come to think of it doesn't di Meola use this sort of pattern too for things like Mediterranean Sundance? Obviously he's known as one of the alternate guys, but he changes it up for these types of passages.)

    Also, from the chart, it looks like a kind of classical piece, but live, it's a high energy burner.

    On a separate, but possibly related topic, have you seen Irrequieto?

    I'm wondering what you have to practice to think of a line like that one.
    I'll take a look at it!

    *there are a heap of great Bluegrass players who alternate... Just reporting how I do it, and AFAIK how Chico does it too.
    Last edited by christianm77; 07-10-2019 at 09:17 AM.

  14. #63

    User Info Menu

    but I'm not a mind reader when it comes to the greats of the past.
    Music can be analyzed in ways that have little to do with original conception of
    the creator. For example, western academics referring to rhythms they encountered
    in African music as polyrhythm.

    It is not the intervallic content that is in question but rather how prince is finding
    greater success in accessing them musically through multiple modifications of
    smaller note collections than he did while focused on scale content.

    It is our imperative as musicians to seek out the best doorways to support our
    creative individuality. Prevailing orthodoxy is cool as something to consider
    but we don't all learn in the same way. While there is likely some common ground
    overlap, the best path forward is a personal puzzle to solve.

  15. #64

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by John A.
    I thought I knew, what you meant, but wasn't entirely sure because you specifically referred to the MM sound, and I don't really think of the MM-mode-thing as a sound so much as a means of organizing one's musical thinking. Regarding Nica's dream, I don't know anything about Horace Silver's composition process, but it's in interesting question and may send me off to google ...

    John
    Yes, that is an interesting one.

  16. #65

    User Info Menu

    "Chelsea Bridge" 1941

    || Bb- maj7 | Ab- maj7 | Bb- maj7 Ab- maj7 | Bb7 | Eb-7 | Ab7 | Db 6 | Db6 / C7 B7 :|| (see "The New Real Book I" for original changes)

    The bass plays the roots and the melody plays the major 7ths in the first two measures.
    Chelsea Bridge is 80 years old now, do we really want to try and make a case to let go of melodic minor?

    Last edited by rintincop; 07-12-2019 at 05:50 PM.

  17. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    "Chelsea Bridge" 1941

    || Bb- maj7 | Ab- maj7 | Bb- maj7 Ab- maj7 | Bb7 | Eb-7 | Ab7 | Db 6 | Db6 / C7 B7 :|| (see "The New Real Book I" for original changes)

    The bass plays the roots and the melody plays the major 7ths in the first two measures.
    Chelsea Bridge is 80 years old now, do we really want to try and make a case to let go of melodic minor?

    I don't think anyone here would suggest that Melodic Minor over the minor tonic is a new idea! Just that using it's modes to address various types of Dominant chords doesn't have to be the only way ... TBH, I'm still waiting for folks to offer strong reasons why MM modes are indispensable for Jazz players who are not so interested in post 70's styles...

  18. #67

    User Info Menu

    I’m such a berk, of course it’s Bbm(maj7) on Chelsea Bridge not Eb7.

    Those unresolved sevenths in the minor key - especially in the shout chorus... are the seed of it all though. That’s jazz baby, not classical... And I might be wrong but I think pretty novel in ‘41.

  19. #68

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    I don't think anyone here would suggest that Melodic Minor over the minor tonic is a new idea! Just that using it's modes to address various types of Dominant chords doesn't have to be the only way ... TBH, I'm still waiting for folks to offer strong reasons why MM modes are indispensable for Jazz players who are not so interested in post 70's styles...
    minor6 is indispensable though.... II minor 6 on V7 is the swing sound - Charlie C, Django, Lester etc (don’t say V9, that’s for chumps)

    So it’s a small step with tritone subs, the m6/m7b5 connection and adding a major seventh to the minor chord to get there without ever having to speak in Greek.

    It’s not actually a big deal, but they had to make it into a thing so that people think they are getting value for money.

    Btw a nice use of m6 like this is Peter Bernstein’s solo on the Goldings trio version of Puttin on the Ritz. Early Peter is very indebted to Charlie and Grant.

  20. #69
    Indeed, that's my feeling too. Where's Reg these days? If he read this thread I'm sure he'd have a word to say !

  21. #70

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Indeed, that's my feeling too. Where's Reg these days? If he read this thread I'm sure he'd have a word to say !
    Probably just super busy with gigs. It’s the season....

  22. #71

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    I don't think anyone here would suggest that Melodic Minor over the minor tonic is a new idea! Just that using it's modes to address various types of Dominant chords doesn't have to be the only way ... TBH, I'm still waiting for folks to offer strong reasons why MM modes are indispensable for Jazz players who are not so interested in post 70's styles...
    I mostly use MM to get quick options for available(close) altered chords. I'd rather go play folk music if there was no easy framework for those. So, the usage is the other way round in my case... mostly.
    I wouldn't ditch MM just because it tends to sound certain way certain times. It is one of those essential things. Many hundreds of years old.

  23. #72

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by emanresu
    I wouldn't ditch MM just because it tends to sound certain way certain times. It is one of those essential things. Many hundreds of years old.
    Yes and no...

    Melodic minor use is... Complex... Mostly what we understand as the melodic minor in jazz - which is of course the ascending form, was used that way... in ascent and melodically, mixed with other scales, most obviously the natural minor or descending form. A good example of a familiar melody that uses this is Beautiful Love.

    At least that's what the textbooks say.

    It's not QUITE that simple. Bach for instance was famously quite fond of the ascending form when descending, especially on V chords. In jazz theory terms we would say he favoured mixolydian b13 (although if you said that in Bach's time they would probably have burned you at the stake.)

    But the idea of using an ascending melodic minor mode to express an altered dominant - I think that's very much a jazz concept AFAIK, but I haven't encountered it in non jazz music, maybe some bits of Ravel. I don't think it would have occurred to most pre jazz composers to apply an Ab minor scale on a G7 chord in the key of Cm, for instance. But, if anyone has an example...

    History and style aside, I think what bothers me about thinking too much about MM use etc is that it draws attention away from language and melody, and really, authentic minor key jazz lines use a lot of mixed modality just like classical music does - even when substituted on dom chords etc... It can sound a bit pedantic sometimes to just use the scale.

    I mean, it's actually pretty hard to sing thirds through the MM scale compared to Major, NM or HM. There's something a bit ... weird and unnatural .... about it from a melodic perspective to the Western Ear. All those tritones and whole tones. Going up fine, but in other directions - takes practice... Not that that's a reason to avoid it necessarily, but it's certainly a little unfamiliar

    Building a line around a triad or other chord is often the best route here.. I've mentioned m6 (which isn't MM per se), but there are many other options of course.
    Last edited by christianm77; 07-13-2019 at 05:01 PM.

  24. #73

    User Info Menu

    I'll vent a little more. Maybe, instead of ditching the MM--we ditch scale talk for a little bit.

    I've known the MM up and down in all keys for 10 years... It never helped me...

    UNTIL I learned how to use it.

    That doesn't mean "use the MM a half step above the dominant or use the MM on the I or the IV"

    Man, I'm telling you all. There's some players still learning scales, that's totally fine. But for a lot of us, it's too much scale talk.

    I think what would helpful is looking at melodic cells/ fragments that use the scales. Not licks, but melodic fragments to build licks upon.

    That comes from transcription, definitely. But we could share those "cells/fragments" with each other and get SO MUCH more mileage than talking about scales over and over and over again.

    This is the frustration I get from most Youtube videos that are of the jazz guitar instructional variety (I'm not lumping you in, Chris'77--this is just a caveat for future videos). Horn players seem to go much deeper than rote scale talk, piano players go deeper as well.

    This isn't a "get rid of theory" rant. This is a "we need to talk more about musical application" rant.

    End rant. I'm quoting Nas now, "You can hate me now, but I won't stop now..."

    I'm used to people not liking what I say, remember? I'm the guy that won't stop blathering about ear training--cause I think that's the most important part of my development, that and LEARNING TUNES (I'm yelling at myself here)

  25. #74

    User Info Menu

    Irez87, I don't think folks claim that melodic minor's purpose is to make nice melodies... it's more about convenient harmonic shapes and coincidences: its i mode is tonic minor, its vi mode is half dim (by coincidence), its 7th mode is ALT (by coincidence) etc...
    I personally can't avoid using it a lot, more than the diminished and whole tone scales. MM is very practical for Wayne Shorter type tunes!

    And MM is the minor version of the 6th diminished scale for block chords (per Barry Harris)

    You want melodic "cells", then internalize the Barry Harris 5432 phrases (and extrapolate the 876 phrases while your at it) , mix and blend them all with 7th chord arpeggios ... also internalize the three essential Bill Evans phrases (cells) , and the classic Oscar Peterson blues break and you are pretty well melodic-ized.

  26. #75

    User Info Menu

    rintincop, I love your handle--honestly (Rin Tin Tin)

    But

    This goes back to what Chris'77 brought up with chord symbols--but I don't want Chris'77 to get flack for my diatribe.

    It's all theory and no sound to me in the way you explained it--to be fair, you gave a quick application.

    What I'm talking about is being more descriptive, though it might sound like the other way.

    Instead, of thinking "vi mode of MM is a half diminished with a natural 9th" I think, okay--now I'm thinking of a ii7b5 with a natural 9th...okay let's look in Cm

    D F Ab C E

    Wait, what--an E natural in Cm--that's a major 3rd.

    Now, the Berklee theorists would say (Peabody voice) "no, you have to think of it as a mode of melodic minor. It's not a major third against a minor tonality"

    I actually had a fierce back and forth on the Youtube comments sections about this... you all are MUCH nicer (and smarter) than the Youtube crowd.

    Anyway, really? Not a major 3rd against a minor tonality? It sure as hellfire sounds like a major 3rd against a minor tonality, especially because the whole progression is in minor. We're not talking a ii7b5 to a V in major--at least not in the Bill Evans sense--I learned in cottage that he was one of the pioneers of that major 9th against a half diminished sound guys.

    So, why the long speech... because I can't play guitar right now cause my in laws are here... Well, that--and

    and it means that you have to pay special attention to how you treat that natural 9th. Prescribing a scale doesn't address that, at all. Nope, nope.

    Same thing happens with the whole altered scale business. Until you hear how others treat that type of harmony, you can't just plug and play and expect to sound passable.

    Harmony--I love discussing harmony. But this post is WAY over my cap--I talk too much. But some of what I say is worth a listen to, I promise.