-
Originally Posted by John A.
Tritone substitution is a very old device. Probably much older then conceptualization of MM scale. According to wikipedia:
"Though examples of the tritone substitution, known in the classical world as an augmented sixth chord, can be found extensively in classical music since the Renaissance period, they were not heard until much later in jazz by musicians such as Dizzy Gillespie and Charlie Parker in the 1940s, as well as Duke Ellington, Art Tatum, Coleman Hawkins, Roy Eldridge and Benny Goodman."
If we are looking for direct links, altered scale would have to be seen as some sort of modal interchange chord. That would mean borrowing the 4th chord from melodic minor tritone away. That seems to be criminal amount of intellectualization. I don't know if it's even technically modal interchange if the key is not the same (but tritone away). Of course alternatively we are borrowing the 7th chord from MM half note away. Equally unsatisfying as a modal interchange concept.Last edited by Tal_175; 07-08-2019 at 04:37 PM.
-
07-08-2019 04:13 PM
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
The Augmented Sixth chord is not exactly same thing as a tritone sub in that though we would write one down as jazzers as a 7 or 7#11 chord, actually the chord comes from voice leading. It's a bit more complicated. The classical idea of harmony is so very different from jazz in some ways.
It's possible to identify augmented sixths in jazz. There's one in round midnight, for instance:
B7#11 Bb7alt Ebm
In this case, a French sixth. It's not really a tritone sub to my mind, because it's more a natural part of minor key harmony than the F7, despite the diatonic root. Also the colour is very much not altered. Anyway, that's being a little bit pedantic. But I do find it interesting that the Italian sixth in this key (B7 (no 3)) is what you get when you take a normal diatonic choice - Ab/Cb and augment the sixth interval Ab to A. Hence the name.
Also, you get this chord EVERYWHERE in pre bop jazz. Also, it harmonises the blues b5 note very well - take Skylark for instance.
But, yeah altered dominants have been around since the 18th century? Minor modal interchange is a simple way of doing it - put the V chord of minor into major, and you get the b9, b13. I think the #9 might be a jazz innovation (because of the false relation) and David Liebmnn suggests it came out of the use of the I blues scale on a V7 chord. So, C minor blues on G7, leaning on the Bb.
-
Another thing - the whole tone scale was really popular in jazz... And that's an interesting one, because it has the #11/b5 sound but also the 9 and b13 - so it's neither bright like Lyd Dom or dark like the Altered. But I would say that the 7b5/#11 sound originates there if I had to guess.
That said, listen to the shout chorus on chelsea bridge - the tonality on the Eb7#11 chord is to my ears at least a Dbmaj7+5 on the Eb7#11. That's pretty Lydian Dominant.
I wonder where he got it from? Lydian Dominant appears in Bartok. But just because someone uses this scale - or the altered - doesn't mean they see it as a melodic minor mode.
For instance, you can define altered as just that - a major scale with every note lowered by a semitone except the root.Last edited by christianm77; 07-09-2019 at 02:41 AM.
-
MM contains 4 modes that are pretty usefull on piano. Just one little note different than the major scale georgraphy. Makes Barry Harris' 6th diminished systems a lot easier to manage.
He says play F mi 6 (ie MM) over D-7 b5
He says play Ab- 6 (ie MM) over G7b9
He says play C-6 (ie MM) over C-
-
Per Mark Levine, there is no avoid note in mel min harmony. He therefore considers all chords generated by mel min harmony to be the same chord. In fact, this works. Try it. So, for example, Bb7#11, Fmmaj7, Dm7b5 and Ealt are the same thing in mel min harmony, among a few others. That may take some time to get into your playing in 12 keys, but it will open things up.
Diminished scales can be tricky to use. Charlie Christian and Chico Pinheiro, to pick a couple of names at random, are masters of the art. CC did it 80 years ago, so he has an excuse for sounding a little old fashioned. Chico's use of the scale is less obvious. Check out Irrequieto on youtube to hear how he does it sometimes.
I sometimes think the nomenclature is confusing. Any dim7 chord is a m6b5 chord. We use m7b5, why not m6b5? How is that worse?
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Any scale introduces a color, a sound over a specific chord that may be consonant or not, and also introduces some new harmony, new chords, who now may have their own scales, sounds and movements.
My approach has been to always start with the original chord, the basic arpeggio. Say on a minor chord, the melodic minor scale would contain that arpeggio and two notes that differ from the natural minor scale. After this though come all the new chords that the melodic minor brings, and the pentatonics, 4 note scales, patterns, etc, more colors to learn.
Then you'd start to mess with the scales that you use over these new chords, so it wouldn't be melodic minor any more, but still playing over its chords you retain some of its momentum. For me it ends up being a mix of chord tone tension-resolution, scale color, in the moment chord theory kind of instant composition thing , that you finally learn the moment you can hear it and play it without thinking about it.
So I guess I see scales as a beginning. Or as one approach out of many. Say the bass player throws you a 5 pedal. You could play some 5 altered sounds, think of the altered scale (or its relative melodic minor), or just play the two dominant chords that come with this scale. Or think of the diminished scale, which would give you 4 dominant chords to work over. Or whole tone which would give 3, etc.. Or do all this over the original tonic chord, without the bass player providing the incentive..
-
Or do like Herbie Hancock when Ron Carter pedals a V, play successive melodic minor scales down in whole steps (equal division of the octave EDO).
Over F7 sus 5 pedal Herbie goes like
C MM
Bb MM
Ab MM
Gb MM
E MM
F7 sus
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
Originally Posted by rintincop
BTW what’s the solo/recording he does this on so I can have a listen?
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Chico Pinheiro does use diminished scale fragments, but he varies things a great deal so there may be other ways to analyze what he does. I think he hears all the notes all the time and plays what he hears. It might comfortably fit within a typical analytic unit, or it might not.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
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.
Chico Pinheiro does use diminished scale fragments, but he varies things a great deal so there may be other ways to analyze what he does. I think he hears all the notes all the time and plays what he hears. It might comfortably fit within a typical analytic unit, or it might not.
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
John
-
Wow, some surprising responses! TBH, I was expecting some staunch support for MM but I'm guessing there aren't as many post CST modernists around here as I thought...
Someone mentioned I'd be missing out on MM for the tonic in Minor, but I don't even like HM for that sound, I dig the b7 too much...
Some point out that MM is just a "pitch collection", and nothing to get hung up over. But I can't help thinking that if anything goes for a Dom chord, then why not just see the Chromatic scale as your "pitch collection" ?
There have been a few references to players who put MM to work in cool ways, but can someone tell me when MM started to be a common "thing" with jazz players and composers? And which players since then have made MM an important part of their sound? Who was incorporating MM into 60's Hard Bop / early Post Bop?
-
I have a feeling that many of the greats like Joe Pass, Wes Montgomery, Ed Bickert, Emily Remler approached improvisation in very practical ways. I bet a lot of what they did was to lift some concepts from their favorite players and experiment with them. They probably woodshedded a few basic concepts (like triads as upper extensions, MM over dominants etc) a lot and tried to find good sounding lines using them to develop their language.
Charlie Parker had small number of short phrases (lick-lets ) that he used a lot but always in fresh and musical ways. So that gives us some insights into what his process was like.
Of course I could be wrong. Maybe they were more cerebral and cutting edge in their approach. I don't know. I would certainly love to find out how these players approached practicing improvisation.
-
Originally Posted by John A.
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
I get the impression MM modes as a concept is a late 60s thing educationally, but is certainly the case that people were using it before.
However did they have a systematised idea of MM harmony, and when did this become established, and what role did jazz edu have in this? I don’t really know. That’s a phd right there.
It is notable that Russell’s hugely influential work the Lydian Chromatic Concept (1953) references the Lydian Augmented (!) so that’s an early instance of an MM mode. It’s not how his theory was framed however.
That’s why I wanted to pin down that Herbie/Ron Carter ref above. It’s frustrating when people come out with stuff because they read it in a book or article, but can’t direct one to the primary source. There are people who can do it here and I’m grateful.
OTOH on the other thread a few thing came up - I’ll find a link to it. The oldest one I think we found was George Shearing’s tune Conception (1950), which is nice because the B section run is a descending C melodic minor scale in ascending form. Further more it’s over a B7alt chord (in C). I would imagine that simple alteration to the key (b3) would be the first common usage of this harmony.
That said, you can see stuff that looks like MM harmony, but could be understood in a different way, in the jazz of that era.
But here’s the thing, an overarching theory of music is less important to the improviser than a series of useful rules of thumb that can be applied right away. As Tal175 says - practical. It doesn’t all need to be MM, except when the MM is relevant and helpful. For instance, we don't need to know the MM scale to play altered dominant resolutions to tonic, or to understand a tritone sub. It's just really not necessary.
(The reason why we use it is some nerd got excited the the MM seemed to explain those two things. Never mind that real music isn't that neat....)
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.
And would say that attitude - against conventional rules - is more genuinely modernist. There’s nothing modernist about following the rules.Last edited by christianm77; 07-09-2019 at 03:21 PM.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Great points though Christian, in all your posts. I sometimes wonder if we afforded too much attention to things like LCC, CST and the whole MM thing. Like Serial composition, 12 tone rows, atonal theory etc, things become fashionable for a few decades, but we somehow seem to always return to the stuff that we feel on a visceral level, as opposed to stuff that appeals to our intellect and makes us feel clever, or, dare I say, "modern" ...
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
John
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
||: Dm | Bbm :||
When playing Dm natural and on Bbm MM - sounds great. I mean, I love to train alt scale that way sometimes. Can't go on dominants too long. Gets to my nerves fast.
-
Originally Posted by John A.
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
Then that turns into the new orthodoxy, and so on.
-
Originally Posted by John A.
It’s friggin minor 6. Shit’s been around since the 1930s
Anyway I blame Billy Strayhorn
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
John
Transcriber wanted
Today, 04:35 PM in Improvisation