Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Posts 201 to 250 of 253
  1. #201

    User Info Menu

    Dadd9/F# // Fsus13 F13 // Bbmaj7 Bbmaj7#5 // E13#9 // Eb lyd // D13#9 // Db13#11 Db7#11b9 // Calt // Fsus13 // Em7b5 Aalt //

    Sorry I find this difficult to parse in terms of structure (which is important to me when looking at a chart.)

    Looks fairly straightforward functionally. So we are in Bb.

    Dadd9/F# is the odd one out really.

    Bb Major so
    V7 --> I --> I7 (tritone) --> IV --> III7 ---> IV7 (tritone) --> II7 --> V7 --> II-7 V7 into with for it.....

    D major (III major)

    So

    Dmajor
    --> Bb ---> Eb lyd --> round the houses --> interrupted with a resolution back to D

    So I could certainly spaff some bebop out on this one.

    I could also spaff chord scales on it too.
    D13#9 - D half-whole
    Db13#11 Db7#11b9 - Db half-whole
    Calt - fuck it, just do C half-whole

    But that doesn't make it the best way to solo on this tune.

    Now, all those busy looking extensions, what do they do? I'd be asking if there's something clever I could do with triads. This would probably need more examination. Could do like,

    D13#9 - B
    Db13#11 Db7#11b9 - Bb to maybe G
    Calt - F#

    Really it would help enormously to hear the melody on this (if there is one), because I'm sure there's some shit going on that would help massively with soloing on it. If Chico's gone to the effort to work out a pathway through it that sounds nice, why throw it away? If not, def something up with that voice leading. It's just chord symbols keep their secrets close sometimes.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #202

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Dadd9/F# // Fsus13 F13 // Bbmaj7 Bbmaj7#5 // E13#9 // Eb lyd // D13#9 // Db13#11 Db7#11b9 // Calt // Fsus13 // Em7b5 Aalt //

    Sorry I find this difficult to parse in terms of st
    Really it would help enormously to hear the melody on this (if there is one), because I'm sure there's some shit going on that would help massively with soloing on it. If Chico's gone to the effort to work out a pathway through it that sounds nice, why throw it away? If not, def something up with that voice leading. It's just chord symbols keep their secrets close sometimes.
    IV7 tritone? Typo, or do I just not understand?

    From different points of view we both ended up in a similar place -- use the melody and think about triads. Chico often plays 3 note chords in his later material, so there may be a good reason for that working well.

    In that guitarwank podcast, Chico talks about Brazilian composition being more melody based with the harmony developed afterward. I think that's one reason why a lot of modern Brazilian tunes are challenging to solo over. Prato Feito (Horta) would be a good example. Toninho found a melody that works with those changes (probably found the melody first, actually) but it's hard to construct another one that works as well. Metheny is the soloist on the recording and the story is that he shedded it for a weekend. Nails the solo.

  4. #203

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Looks fairly straightforward functionally. So we are in Bb.

    Dadd9/F# is the odd one out really.

    Bb Major so
    V7 --> I --> I7 (tritone) --> IV --> III7 ---> IV7 (tritone) --> II7 --> V7 --> II-7 V7 into with for it.....
    If you think of it this way, you play (ignoring the first chord) F7 Bbmaj7 E7 Eb D7 A7 (wrong?) C7 G7 Cm7 F7. (I have an easier time with thinking in a key).

    chords are add9/F# // Fsus13 F13 // Bbmaj7 Bbmaj7#5 // E13#9 // Eb lyd // D13#9 // Db13#11 Db7#11b9 // Calt // Fsus13 // Em7b5 Aalt //

    But, to get the sound of the tune, you have to make a number of adjustments. First opportunity for a clam is if you play an F over Bbmaj7#5. Or a Bb against the Eb. Or miss the altered fifths and ninths on some of the rest.

    How do you think about that? How do you go from your sketch of functional harmony to actually nailing the changes?

    Here's a video:


  5. #204

    User Info Menu

    Man... a young Scotty, mama would be proud.

    So do you just play... I've always made quick analysis of all new tunes.... I always start with changes, or roots, and then the melody. I could start with melody first... but 99% of tune melodies use the harmony to frame notes of melody... the a 9th isn't a 9th or a chord tone isn't a chord tone without a harmonic reference.

    It doesn't make a difference... the melody fills in the unknown of the changes... and the changes fill in the unknowns of the melody.... I mean after a while this takes... 10 to 20 seconds. Then while your performing.... you listen and finalize the analysis of the tune. Now you have the basic harmonic, melodic, rhythmic etc... Reference to start with.

    I mean playing the changes is like the obvious, or at least it should be eventually if you go through this process. Eventually you'll have pre-fab or previous analysis to work with. Kind of like... C7 implies Rt 3rd, 5th and b7...and in different musical contexts... the extensions can change. Anyway probable for most this is a slow process now... but if you start... it becomes faster and eventually... yea 30 sec. or less. I mean most practice playing right, why not actually practice understanding what your playing?

  6. #205

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    If you think of it this way, you play (ignoring the first chord) F7 Bbmaj7 E7 Eb D7 A7 (wrong?) C7 G7 Cm7 F7. (I have an easier time with thinking in a key).

    chords are add9/F# // Fsus13 F13 // Bbmaj7 Bbmaj7#5 // E13#9 // Eb lyd // D13#9 // Db13#11 Db7#11b9 // Calt // Fsus13 // Em7b5 Aalt //

    But, to get the sound of the tune, you have to make a number of adjustments. First opportunity for a clam is if you play an F over Bbmaj7#5. Or a Bb against the Eb. Or miss the altered fifths and ninths on some of the rest.

    How do you think about that? How do you go from your sketch of functional harmony to actually nailing the changes?

    Here's a video:

    Well that’s why you have to learn the song lol

    also did you read my post?

    in bebop playing you generally don’t care about the written extensions.

    In more modern styles the extensions usually relate to the written melody in some way, and are honoured in the chord scale choices you make over them.

    Jordan has a good approach of doing this while getting out of seven note scale mind set, which is good for making sure you get the sound while still playing melodically.

    again, need to study the tune. But fundamentally: don’t ignore the melody, or you are being a right plonker.

    EDIT: It’s a really nice tune. No written melody over the soloing changes right?

  7. #206

    User Info Menu

    Also why the fuck are you asking me this question when you could ask Chico? I have to look after a toddler and have basically no time to sit down and play. Also he’s better than me. Also he wrote the tune. What does he play on it?

    From my limited analysis of his playing so far he does both windy windy bebop and clever stuff with triads.

    Last edited by christianm77; 03-27-2020 at 01:39 PM.

  8. #207

    User Info Menu

    Solo is about 4m in (link is not good in vid is ok no one watched it anyway)

  9. #208

    User Info Menu

    Over the years, I have occasionally asked a master improviser what they were playing over something.

    I have yet to hear an answer which referred to specific scales, modes arps or etc.

    Common answer is, "I don't know".

    I've also heard "I was thinking about targets".

    My favorite answer, "I was thinking darker". That's a real answer, not a joke.

    Another, "I just heard it".

    A good answer, "Don't ask what he did, ask what he practiced to be able to do what he did".

    My question still stands. When you see a progression like Arabesca and (to pick a small instance) and the chord is Bbmaj7#5, how do you get to the F#? In
    I do it by note name. So I know it's an F# and I know where every F# is on the guitar. I also know that Bbmaj7#5 is a D triad over a Bb, and I know each of those notes by name. So, when I see the chord symbol, I can jump right on any chord tone, if I need to. This is not making music, it's avoiding clams, but clam-avoidance is a worthwhile thing on the way toward music.

    I'm just curious about how people do this without reference to note name. Do you have to think "Bb and the #5 is two strings up and one fret lower?" How do people do it? Do you have a maj7#5 fingering pattern so ingrained that you can leap to any note within it?

    BTW, this is a real question, not a troll. I'm really curious about this. The only way I could figure out how to do it was by note name.

  10. #209

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Also why the fuck are you asking me this question when you could ask Chico? I have to look after a toddler and have basically no time to sit down and play. Also he’s better than me. Also he wrote the tune. What does he play on it?

    From my limited analysis of his playing so far he does both windy windy bebop and clever stuff with triads.

    I have heard him sound like himself (meaning the way he hears harmony which strikes me as unique) playing a ii V I in Cmaj.

    When I transcribed the line, it was D dorian to Galt.

    Suffice it say, when I play D dorian to Galt, I don't get his sound.

    It reminds me of that Jimmy Bruno video somebody posted recently. He plays in Cmajor (all diatonic) against some changes and it sounds like good jazz. Other people, well, not so much.

    So, I think it's melodic gift.

  11. #210

    User Info Menu

    That shows nothing more than the limitations of boiling everything down to seven note pitch sets. There’s more analysis to be done than that.

    Take the way I break down a couple of licks rhythmically, in terms of contour, rhythm etc. I’m not saying it’s particularly clever or unusual but there’s a lot you can learn from a small snippet of information. Doesn’t mean you’ll play like PG but you might learn why you like a line so much and be able to put that in your own music.

    why does PG’s dorian to altered sound better than yours? What can you learn beyond that? Even, send me the lick, I’ll do an analysis when I am bored. I bet I can think of ten things I can tell you about that lick.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-27-2020 at 05:06 PM.

  12. #211
    Art Lande: "I was thinking shapes."
    Mark Levine: "I was thinking making the changes."
    Mark Isham: "I was thinking melody."
    Last edited by rintincop; 03-27-2020 at 11:07 PM.

  13. #212

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    oh that is so boring and limited. You can do better than that!

    that shows nothing more than the limitations of boiling everything down to seven note pitch sets. There’s more analysis to be done than that.

    Take the way I break down a couple of licks rhythmically, in terms of contour, rhythm etc. I’m not saying it’s particularly clever or unusual but there’s a lot you can learn from a small snippet of information. Doesn’t mean you’ll play like PG but you might learn why you like a line so much and be able to put that in your own music.

    why does PG’s dorian to altered sound better than yours? What can you learn beyond that? Even, send me the lick, I’ll do an analysis when I am bored. I bet I can think of ten things I can tell you about that lick.
    We may differ in the way we view the notion of melodic gifts. That Jimmy Bruno video may be the better example because there are so many great sounding lines, all with the notes of Cmajor. You can analyze them to death, but, apparently, he doesn't. If the verbal analysis is helpful to someone, that's great. But, I doubt that truly great players got there that way. Big ears, great time feel and melodic and harmonic gifts are involved IMO. Just a bit of evidence for this is the way great players can't talk about what they were thinking.

  14. #213

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    We may differ in the way we view the notion of melodic gifts. That Jimmy Bruno video may be the better example because there are so many great sounding lines, all with the notes of Cmajor. You can analyze them to death, but, apparently, he doesn't. If the verbal analysis is helpful to someone, that's great. But, I doubt that truly great players got there that way. Big ears, great time feel and melodic and harmonic gifts are involved IMO. Just a bit of evidence for this is the way great players can't talk about what they were thinking.
    of course they can’t talk about what they play. I mean that’s obvious right? If you are engaged with the creative process you don’t do any thinking. Thinking is the enemy on the bandstand. It comes between you and the deed of your hand. (To mutilate Yeats)

    Don’t get that confused with the other side of it. The study of the music. Musicians can and will talk about what others play, even if they might not always use technical terms from jazz school. They have picked apart other people’s music and mined it for inspiration.

    Look, for instance, Miles Okazaki recalls spending an afternoon while George Benson played his favourite Charlie Christian solos and pointed out little details, features and elements that interested or inspired him. Needless to say this was inspiring and fascinating.

    if you’ve ever had the chance to sit down and listen to music with a really good musician you’d probably have had that experience right? They hear things you didn’t hear. Listening itself is a creative act.

    (And isn’t a cheesy test of creativity? divergent thinking exercises?)

    Analysis is any different to this, it’s just giving it a formal name and doing it with the ‘correct’ technical terms. I emphasise it is creative, and personal, because one person will notice different things from the next.

    Every jazz musician has an intimate connection with the music itself. Analysis isn’t simply - ‘oh it’s that scale’. It’s about noticing all sort of elements.

    That’s perhaps one think Jimmy means when he does the C major thing. It sounds good because of reasons other than the pitch set he uses. That doesn’t mean there’s nothing to learn from it.

    And this brings me to my central point - CST is the only tool a lot of people have. And it’s of limited use because not all pitch sets in the same mode are fungible. I mean - what???? Seriously??? That’s what someone can offer to say on say a Bach extract say is that it is ‘diatonic minor’? Well it might be true, but it’s not even the beginning of the story. It’s such an incredibly stupid, philistine and barbaric way to view music it actually makes me angry. Grrrrr!

    Ok I’ve calmed down. Analysis is always a reduction or abstraction of the thing you are looking at, but I’m pretty certain there are more interesting things we can notice about music than what scales it uses. I mean I’d think I was erecting a straw man of CST, but that is kind of what you are saying.

    What elements do you notice in the Chico lick? What strikes you as interesting about it? Honestly, send it to me, or post it up on a new thread. My thoughts in exchange for yours. Let’s use this forum for something constructive.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-28-2020 at 04:36 AM.

  15. #214

    User Info Menu

    People can talk endlessly about art.

    I doubt that the ability to do that correlates well with the ability to create great art. If it did, the critics would be great artists..

    Great time, great harmonic ears and a gift for melody are the most important elements. There's a limit to the benefits of analysis, and the greats are all behond that limit.

    Jimmy Bruno is fine teacher, but I don't think he can teach you to do what he did in the Key of C improv video.

    I think the analysis allows people to play at a certain level. But, when you're around genius, it's very different.

    As far as what strikes me about Chico's playing is that he achieves a certain sound via harmony ... and that he can achieve it on his very complex tunes but also on a ii V I. It is isn't the note pool or the time. Rather, it's the way he conceptualizes melody while achieving his own sound. I don't think I can describe it any better than that. To my ear, he doesn't sound like anybody else -- and he accomplishes that partly in a way that I think is unusual.

  16. #215

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    People can talk endlessly about art.

    I doubt that the ability to do that correlates well with the ability to create great art. If it did, the critics would be great artists..

    Great time, great harmonic ears and a gift for melody are the most important elements. There's a limit to the benefits of analysis, and the greats are all behond that limit.

    Jimmy Bruno is fine teacher, but I don't think he can teach you to do what he did in the Key of C improv video.

    I think the analysis allows people to play at a certain level. But, when you're around genius, it's very different.
    Argh, did you read my post at all? It was rather long, but it basically addresses all the points in this one. I mean if I was to sum up your position it would be:

    ’because great musicians can’t tell you what they just played that means they’ve never spent any time studying and breaking down the music of their heroes.’

    this is so obviously a silly position to hold, that I feel it’s hardly worth addressing.

    You must realise this right? Is that a straw man?

    So, lots of people confuse the creative process itself (grace) and what we do to work towards a command of art that allows that to happen (craft.) (This is why the guitar community is full of bedroom noodlers who never improve obviously. And in their own way they may even have a little grace. If we’ve learned anything from rock guitar you don’t need to be a virtuoso to have that quality.)

    So the creative process which is as resistant to analysis as you say . the root of genius is interesting here. I think most musicians would identify with the older meaning, of a spirit that inhabits you, for instance, when you make music. (This is of course why organised religion has always had a complex relationship with music. They know it’s a form of divination. When daemons became demons become devils, and genii become djinn.)

    needless to say the modern world secularises this. We talk about flow states and being ‘in the zone.’ We can use outdated neuroscience to talk about left brain/right brain. But the subjective experience remains the same.

    We all do things we aren’t aware of if we are in the zone. plenty of times I’ve had students ask me to break things down and I have to really think about it, or observed something I am unaware of in my playing (often to do with rhythm) and I’m like - errr OK. And I’m obviously not a genius lol. But maybe a passing genius passed through me and made music for a chorus until I frightened it off by thinking ‘argh what chord are we on?’ or some such.

    so let’s not get too hung up on the ‘greats’ bullshit. I’ve been around world class players and generally I am impressed by their depth of knowledge of the music and their listening even if this isn’t always academically framed (and given most of today’s name players are music school graduates and associate professors of this or that school, they usually have that language.) Of course they are inspiring and amazing, but there’s always a sense of craft as well as grace.

    You obviously need both, right?

    If you find yourself having to think on the bandstand, that brings us to point 2:

    all the hard work that you have to do to prepare yourself to get to that position. While a great musician can’t tell you what they did to make music out of the C major scale they can probably tell you who they listened to and what they practiced. And if you are lucky enough, they can talk about the music with great perception while you listen.

    And if you aren’t a purely passive learner you can dig into it and work shit out. That’s the main difference between my good students and the ones who don’t improve so fast tbh. (It’s humbling as a teacher, but maybe it is possible to teach self directed learning.)

    why? Because it’s fun. Serious fun.

    So the trick is - ‘to be able to forget all that shit and just play.’ That’s .... not easy. Why do you think there was such a mystique about drugs in the 50s, and less lamentably, Eastern religions in the 60s and 70s? Or the self helpy Kenny Werner thing in the 90s/00s?

    But you do have to have something to forget because we can all just strum some chords at home and get into a meditative state. Not so easy when playing Giant Steps to a listening audience with great musicians.

    But the process isn’t so different. Learn —> forget. Open chords were impossible when we first attempted them. So many hours just going from one to the other. Took me forever!

    I mean, you must understand all this right?

    As far as what strikes me about Chico's playing is that he achieves a certain sound via harmony ... and that he can achieve it on his very complex tunes but also on a ii V I. It is isn't the note pool or the time. Rather, it's the way he conceptualizes melody while achieving his own sound. I don't think I can describe it any better than that. To my ear, he doesn't sound like anybody else -- and he accomplishes that partly in a way that I think is unusual.
    Ok let’s move it away from words. Do you feel you learned anything from it beyond ‘Chico is magic.’ (I’m not saying Chico isn’t magic.)

    You don’t have to be able to put it in words for it to valuable obviously.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-28-2020 at 06:02 AM.

  17. #216

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Argh, did you read my post at all? It was rather long, but it basically addresses all the points in this one. I mean if I was to sum up your position it would be:

    ’because great musicians can’t tell you what they just played that means they’ve never spent any time studying and breaking down the music of their heroes.’
    .
    We're still talking past each other.

    My response to this is that many mediocre musicians have done all of that too. It is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition.

    I'm inclined to agree with the notion that truly great jazz can be learned, but it can't be taught. Journeyman jazz can be taught.

    I think there are some well educated players who have difficulty transcending all that detail.

    I'll probably elaborate tomorrow.

  18. #217

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    We're still talking past each other.

    My response to this is that many mediocre musicians have done all of that too. It is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition.

    I'm inclined to agree with the notion that truly great jazz can be learned, but it can't be taught. Journeyman jazz can be taught.

    I think there are some well educated players who have difficulty transcending all that detail.
    AYE. It’s not easy.

    but I feel I’m starting to make progress with this. Actually this is as much of a Kolb cycle as anything else if you know what to look for.

    I'll probably elaborate tomorrow.
    Look I’m pretty much losing the plot here haha. Thanks for continuing to engage :-)

    I still want to take a look at the Chico stuff. I might not have time to sit down and work stuff out from recordings at the moment, but it’s always more fun for me to be talking about specific music in this context.

    The philosophy of art is not actually that complicated intellectually. actually applying it is really hard lol.

  19. #218

    User Info Menu

    Stan Getz was the first jazzer I really listened to, along with Bob Brookmeyer, and I have to say he contributed in a profound way to my musical foundations. Eleven years old, hanging out of my bedroom window looking at the dark trees and the moon, listening to Willow Weep For Me and Crazy Rhythm. As many of you no doubt know (sorry if it's way back in the post), he said

    'It’s like a language. You learn the alphabet, which are the scales. You learn sentences, which are the chords. And then you talk extemporaneously with the horn. It’s a wonderful thing to speak extemporaneously, which is something I’ve never gotten the hang of. But musically I love to talk just off the top of my head. And that’s what jazz music is all about. '

    IOW you need to have something to say, or you'll just be chopping wood.

    Chords and scales have relationships which we can use or ignore. We shouldn't be trapped by them. I mentioned in another post Brad Mehldau's piano solo on a Sco contrafact. It didn't admit to there being any chords there at all yet it was stunning. I still think woodshedding your chords and scales (and technique) is a good thing, but it's only one of many important relationships that will enlarge you as a musician. It's 'key' but not 'the key'.

  20. #219

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    AYE. It’s not easy.

    but I feel I’m starting to make progress with this. Actually this is as much of a Kolb cycle as anything else if you know what to look for.



    Look I’m pretty much losing the plot here haha. Thanks for continuing to engage :-)

    Kolb Cycle: I can find a description, but I can't find anything like a factor analysis of actual data which verifies his four learning styles. Is there proof of concept?

    I still want to take a look at the Chico stuff. I might not have time to sit down and work stuff out from recordings at the moment, but it’s always more fun for me to be talking about specific music in this context.

    The philosophy of art is not actually that complicated intellectually. actually applying it is really hard lol.
    The link below should take you to a transcription of Chico's solo on Tempestade. Transcribed by the great San Diego pianist Danny Green (who has a bunch of albums out -- with great writing, an individual style and great playing.)

    I know there are some other transcriptions floating around, but I haven't found them yet. Anybody?

    http://dannygreen.net/wp-content/upl...HJx5eeIFc8fmmM
    Last edited by rpjazzguitar; 03-28-2020 at 03:23 PM.

  21. #220
    "My response to this is that many mediocre musicians have done all of that too. It is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition."

    And my response to that is those mediocre musicians didn't work hard enough or weren't clever enough to focus on what was important.


    "I'm inclined to agree with the notion that truly great jazz can be learned, but it can't be taught. Journeyman jazz can be taught. "

    Jazz improvisation can be encouraged (taught). Barry Harris does it. To do so takes wisdom, experience, deep knowledge of craft, psychology, experience about knowing what works, and how to communicate what is important to a student.
    I am in agreement with chrstianm77's opinions, not with rpjazz's.

  22. #221

  23. #222

  24. #223

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    [I]
    " a student.
    [/B]
    I am in agreement with chrstianm77's opinions, not with rpjazz's.
    rintincop ... no problem. differences of opinion, well discussed, are great.

    Here's Scofield's:

    AZZed: Flipside of the same question: what do you find to be most frustrating or un-enjoyable about teaching?

    JS: Unfortunately, it’s teaching people who are not very talented. That’s always going to be a problem for any instructor students who really want to get it, but just don’t have what it takes to play at an advanced level. Then it gets very difficult, trying to explain to someone how to play jazz. What is it that makes jazz good? Because it’s way too intangible to try and explain.

    John Scofield: This phrase is probably not very popular, because it’s a little too cute, but I do like it: “Jazz can be learned, but it can’t be taught.” I think when you have a talented student, it’s a pleasure and a very, very wonderful experience for a teacher. But when you have someone who really wants to know, but just doesn’t have the skills… it’s sad in a way, because you can’t help that person much past a certain point.

  25. #224
    I know John by the way. Okay, so John Scofield says he can't teach jazz... that's him. I've known for a long time that most of the best players cannot teach because they don't have the patience, the time, or much insight into effective teaching methods for teaching melodic composition. I think Mark Levine doesn't really teach, he lectures his book. He doesn't get much into melodic composition. However he does a good job of demonstrating melodic sequencing.

    As christianm77 said, passive learners don't excel. I have always said learning jazz requires somebody who is a self starter and very dedicated to learning the craft which is rare. I am sure jazz can be taught by Barry Harris. And I am of the opinion it can be taught by christianm77. I know I can teach jazz as that is how I make the bulk of my income.

  26. #225

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    I know John by the way. Okay, so John Scofield says he can't teach jazz... that's him. I've known for a long time that most of the best players cannot teach because they don't have the patience or an insight into effective teaching methods. Mark Levine doesn't teach, he lectures. He doesn't get into melodic composition.

    As christianm77 said, passive learners don't excel. I have always said learning jazz requires somebody who is a self starter and very dedicated to learning the craft. I am sure jazz can be taught by Barry Harris. And I am of the opinion it can be taught by christianm77. I know I can teach jazz as that is how I make the bulk of my income.
    Appreciate that. Can you really turn a finger wiggler into a guy who can do what Jimmy Bruno did on that video where he sounds great playing only the notes of a C major scale?

    If you can, I'd say you're doing better than any teacher I've studied with -- and I've studied with some fine players with a lot of teaching experience, including three with published method books and another with multiple videos for sale. Four names you'd probably know. Of course, that's no guarantee they can teach.

    OTOH, if even pro musicians/teachers at their level can't do it, and Scofield can't do it, even though somebody even more skilled can, what does that say about the "teachability" of jazz?

    My own experience after a very long time trying is that there are important things I don't expect ever to be able to do -- based on a lot of effort with unacceptable results, including years with teachers. I also believe that my phone finally started to ring more often when I stopped formal, regular study and, instead, focused on being musical with what I already knew.

    I think Jimmy Bruno's video makes that point beautifully. One scale, no sharps or flats. Fairly simple chord progression. Sounds like good jazz.
    How is that effectively taught? I ask that out of genuine curiosity, not to be argumentative.

  27. #226

    User Info Menu

    Thanks rp, will take a look at this when I get a chance.

  28. #227

    User Info Menu

    No a teacher can’t teach jazz - at least not on their own.... well anyway read my essay elsewhere on my forum for my thoughts on that.

    you know what taught jazz? NYC in the 50s. That community and that environment. Read Paul Berliner.

    What can we do? Encourage community. Encourage self directed learning behaviours, curiosity, appetite for struggle and learning and creativity. And the nurturing of mutual aid and communal learning. Like the guys did back in the day.

    the idea of the lone genius is one of the most dangerous in education. It’s bullshit. Did you know Trane went to Detroit to check out what Barry was doing? He was hungry for info. He’d already studied with Sandole and he was talking about ragas and Webern in the 1940s (!)

    People were checking out what other people had learned.

    Ask any jazz player. Any real one. Community.

  29. #228
    "Can you really turn a finger wiggler into a guy who can do what Jimmy Bruno did on that video where he sounds great playing only the notes of a C major scale? "

    There are tons of hopeless cases or slackers, imo. They don't or can't train like a professional, life get's in the way too. I don't think I implied anyone can be taught jazz. I did say that in order to succeed a student must be a self starter, a dedicated hard worker, and of course have a normal degree of coordination and aural recognition ability. They need to train like a professional. IMO, most students simply don't meet those qualifications.


    "If you can, I'd say you're doing better than any teacher I've studied with -- and I've studied with some fine players with a lot of teaching experience and three with published method books. Of course, that's no guarantee they can teach. OTOH, if even pro musicians/teachers at their level can't do it, even though somebody more elite can, what does that say about the "teachability" of jazz? "

    I have studied with famous players who are very poor teachers, write books and are experienced. They usually teach harmony, that's the easy part. They usually do not have a concept of how to teach melodic skills. Teaching melodic creation and embellishment is not well understood. It's also neglected in the teaching of classical composition too. The "teachability" of jazz improvisation is so bad in the teaching field because melodic teaching is so poorly understood and executed thorughout music education, imo.

    I have studied with a few teachers who are not famous or brilliant players but did a good job of teaching melodic resolution tendencies for every degree of the scale and melodic embellishment of every degree of the scale. Great players usually have no patience or time for that sort of detail.
    Last edited by rintincop; 03-28-2020 at 07:58 PM.

  30. #229
    He does routinely play chromatic approach notes that slide into his major scale notes, so it's not just the major scale notes he's sounding.
    Last edited by rintincop; 03-28-2020 at 08:22 PM.

  31. #230

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    "Can you really turn a finger wiggler into a guy who can do what Jimmy Bruno did on that video where he sounds great playing only the notes of a C major scale? "

    There are tons of hopeless cases or slackers, imo. They don't or can't train like a professional, life get's in the way too. I don't think I implied anyone can be taught jazz. I did say that in order to succeed a student must be a self starter, a dedicated hard worker, and of course have a normal degree of coordination and aural recognition ability. They need to train like a professional. IMO, most students simply don't meet those qualifications.


    "If you can, I'd say you're doing better than any teacher I've studied with -- and I've studied with some fine players with a lot of teaching experience and three with published method books. Of course, that's no guarantee they can teach. OTOH, if even pro musicians/teachers at their level can't do it, even though somebody more elite can, what does that say about the "teachability" of jazz? "

    I have studied with famous players who are very poor teachers, write books and are experienced. They usually teach harmony, that's the easy part. They usually do not have a concept of how to teach melodic skills. Teaching melodic creation and embellishment is not well understood. It's also neglected in the teaching of classical composition too. The "teachability" of jazz improvisation is so bad in the teaching field because melodic teaching is so poorly understood and executed thorughout music education, imo.

    I have studied with a few teachers who are not famous or brilliant players but did a good job of teaching melodic resolution tendencies for every degree of the scale and melodic embellishment of every degree of the scale. Great players usually have no patience or time for that sort of detail.
    Can you share some kind of outline of how you approach teaching melodic skills?

  32. #231

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    No a teacher can’t teach jazz - at least not on their own.... well anyway read my essay elsewhere on my forum for my thoughts on that.

    you know what taught jazz? NYC in the 50s. That community and that environment. Read Paul Berliner.

    What can we do? Encourage community. Encourage self directed learning behaviours, curiosity, appetite for struggle and learning and creativity. And the nurturing of mutual aid and communal learning. Like the guys did back in the day.

    the idea of the lone genius is one of the most dangerous in education. It’s bullshit. Did you know Trane went to Detroit to check out what Barry was doing? He was hungry for info. He’d already studied with Sandole and he was talking about ragas and Webern in the 1940s (!)

    People were checking out what other people had learned.

    Ask any jazz player. Any real one. Community.
    I am largely in agreement with this view.

    But, I'll add something about community and how it has changed.

    I wasn't a player in NYC in the 50s, but I was there and a player in the last four years of the 60s.

    It was about community. To quote Springsteen, "the land of peace, love, justice and no mercy".

    Everybody got a chance to be part of the working jazz community. Multiple chances over time. But, if you didn't have the ability (which I think requires a healthy dose of talent, in addition to great effort), you didn't get to be a part of that community. And, gigs may have been more plentiful then, so the community might have been bigger.

    Nowadays, a high school grad with limited skills, but enough money, can study guitar at a large number of colleges. The weeding-out process has changed.

    This is, btw, a mixed blessing IMO. On the positive side, it gives people an opportunity to engage with a subject they love. They have a chance to progress. On the negative side, I'm pretty sure there's false hope involved for some students.

    One last point. The community still exists at the top. And those with sufficient ability are welcomed.

  33. #232

    User Info Menu

    Oh yeah the entry point was heavily policed.

    goes back to the self directed thing though. No one was handing out info. You had to beg, borrow or steal it.

    Look no one does this stupid art form unless they are super motivated. Talent is .... I don’t know? Like everyone I know in my professional circle is super talented by the standards of regular humans. But I think mostly they work fucking hard and have done so since their teens.

    I had a pint with a top UK jazz educator who said the most important thing is cohort. He’s had Jacob Collier in his classes. So he’s seen prodigious talent close up.

    He said if you are surrounded by mediocrity you will be mediocre and he characterised that by a lack of drive and self direction.

    If you are surrounded by excellence you have a better chance of being excellent. Hard work. People in the shed ten hours a day.

    Many musicians have said this. You know this, I think. It’s just hard to fathom how much work goes into being what you characterise as genius, and most of us, it’s true, won’t get there.

    but still we can enjoy the climb. You don’t just climb for the view. obviously to others you and I might seem inexplicably talented, believe or not, so it’s all relative.

    We might not be able to surround ourselves with super self motivated and hard working players IRL ( esp atm), but we can still kick each other up the arse on the internet

    (Hopefully you can sense the good humour in it. If you told me to fuck off I would not hold it against you haha)
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-29-2020 at 07:12 AM.

  34. #233

    User Info Menu

    Ok so that solo is another solo on the tune that I worked out a couple of licks on. It’s not the same solo... album version?

    i tend to do youtube cos a lot of tracks on iTunes you can’t slow down now.

    Also it’s convenient from the perspective of this forum.

    however I rarely bother to write things down so probably a good exercise to do it (I did find a couple of transcriptions that I did write straight to score as an exercise a while back that I might post)

    I’ll start by picking apart a single lick.

  35. #234

    User Info Menu

    Ok I’m not sure if that solo is from the album track.

    so what I’ll do is I’ll carry on with my transcription of the you tube version - no point wasting good work. This tune has quite straightforward changes.

    or.... I could do Arabesque?

    tell you what, I do one you do the other. One phrase at a time. I’ll trade you.

  36. #235

    User Info Menu


  37. #236

    User Info Menu

    So now that we're getting into compositional aspect of playing.... sounds like rintincop... you obviously didn't study with the right teachers. What composers have you studied with, really. Generally players are for teaching mechanical technique. And I would agree with you... most teachers don't do that great at teaching guitar technique, now that most teachers believe CST is a performance theory application or you work old school and pound melodies and ancient melodic tendencies into players trying to sound like jazz players. What do you expect...

    Somewhat modern, ( last 60+ years ), there are very... common practice... melodic usage... practices. And ton's of very mechanical melodic relationships with steps of development, all with relationship to Tonal and modal references.
    And basic compositional usage of ...
    Rhythm, Dynamics, Melody, Harmony, Tone, Texture, Form etc... all the very basics of creating melody.

    What's interesting is all these basic aspect of music... can and are expanded with jazz characteristics.

    Anyway... most of these were taught to me as a kid. I went through the 12 steps of melodic development as a kid... it was pretty vanilla, and still is to me personally.

    While I dig Jimmy's BS. he's still boring. He has some chops.... what really good musician doesn't. You can't play jazz without chops. Chops come from good technique.... you still need to have something to say... (musical definition of something to say), being able to describe "what you have to say", using terminology from above compositional terminology... (not using bathroom terminology).

    Hell just being aware and understanding compositional terminology... will make you a better melodic player... If that's what your after.

    I could post Basic musical composition elements with related musical terms from main categories etc... and get into applications.... yea no one really cares.

  38. #237
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    So now that we're getting into compositional aspect of playing.... sounds like rintincop... you obviously didn't study with the right teachers. What composers have you studied with, really. Generally players are for teaching mechanical technique. And I would agree with you... most teachers don't do that great at teaching guitar technique, now that most teachers believe CST is a performance theory application or you work old school and pound melodies and ancient melodic tendencies into players trying to sound like jazz players. What do you expect...

    Somewhat modern, ( last 60+ years ), there are very... common practice... melodic usage... practices. And ton's of very mechanical melodic relationships with steps of development, all with relationship to Tonal and modal references.
    And basic compositional usage of ...
    Rhythm, Dynamics, Melody, Harmony, Tone, Texture, Form etc... all the very basics of creating melody.

    What's interesting is all these basic aspect of music... can and are expanded with jazz characteristics.

    Anyway... most of these were taught to me as a kid. I went through the 12 steps of melodic development as a kid... it was pretty vanilla, and still is to me personally.

    While I dig Jimmy's BS. he's still boring. He has some chops.... what really good musician doesn't. You can't play jazz without chops. Chops come from good technique.... you still need to have something to say... (musical definition of something to say), being able to describe "what you have to say", using terminology from above compositional terminology... (not using bathroom terminology).

    Hell just being aware and understanding compositional terminology... will make you a better melodic player... If that's what your after.

    I could post Basic musical composition elements with related musical terms from main categories etc... and get into applications.... yea no one really cares.
    I agree with these opinions. Except I don't think Jimmy is boring. That's getting into a matter of taste, and has nothing to do with teaching melodic improvisation, imo. I think Jimmy is very swinging, melodic and hip. I enjoy his playing. However I don't care for his aggressive personality.

  39. #238

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Oh yeah the entry point was heavily policed.

    goes back to the self directed thing though. No one was handing out info. You had to beg, borrow or steal it.

    Look no one does this stupid art form unless they are super motivated. Talent is .... I don’t know? Like everyone I know in my professional circle is super talented by the standards of regular humans. But I think mostly they work fucking hard and have done so since their teens.

    I had a pint with a top UK jazz educator who said the most important thing is cohort. He’s had Jacob Collier in his classes. So he’s seen prodigious talent close up.

    He said if you are surrounded by mediocrity you will be mediocre and he characterised that by a lack of drive and self direction.

    If you are surrounded by excellence you have a better chance of being excellent. Hard work. People in the shed ten hours a day.

    Many musicians have said this. You know this, I think. It’s just hard to fathom how much work goes into being what you characterise as genius, and most of us, it’s true, won’t get there.

    but still we can enjoy the climb. You don’t just climb for the view. obviously to others you and I might seem inexplicably talented, believe or not, so it’s all relative.

    We might not be able to surround ourselves with super self motivated and hard working players IRL ( esp atm), but we can still kick each other up the arse on the internet

    (Hopefully you can sense the good humour in it. If you told me to fuck off I would not hold it against you haha)
    Collier is a good example. How many hours could he have spent in the shed at the time one of his uploads caught Quncy Jones' attention? Collier was 19 years old at the time. I don't think it was so much the practice time as the early exposure by growing up in an extremely musical family.

    Christian, I think you'll disagree with this, but here's why I think this way. I have been very fortunate to have spent many hours jamming with players I'd consider musical geniuses. I certainly didn't belong there on pure merit, but circumstances permitted it (mine was often, in effect, the student chair in the group).

    Seeing genius up close changed the way I think about ability. Around here, they're called "one of those guys". We know who they are. Sure, they put in the work, but in their backgrounds you can see a record of musical success, like Collier's, in their mid teens -- before they were alive long enough to put in the time that older but lesser players have. I'm convinced that it's extraordinary talent and not just anybody, in fact hardly anybody at all, can do it.

    There's a point in a disagreement where the participants drill down through the evidence to what I think of as the religion. The unshakable belief that can't be proved or disproved. Feels like we're at that point in this discussion. Thanks for participating. I think it's a good use of the forum.

  40. #239

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Ok I’m not sure if that solo is from the album track.

    so what I’ll do is I’ll carry on with my transcription of the you tube version - no point wasting good work. This tune has quite straightforward changes.

    or.... I could do Arabesque?

    tell you what, I do one you do the other. One phrase at a time. I’ll trade you.
    I thought I posted this, but maybe I didn't. That Tempestade solo is on Nova, the album Chico did with Anthony Wilson. It's on youtube. I think it's the second tune on the album.

  41. #240

    User Info Menu

    Ok cool

  42. #241

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Collier is a good example. How many hours could he have spent in the shed at the time one of his uploads caught Quncy Jones' attention? Collier was 19 years old at the time. I don't think it was so much the practice time as the early exposure by growing up in an extremely musical family.

    Christian, I think you'll disagree with this, but here's why I think this way. I have been very fortunate to have spent many hours jamming with players I'd consider musical geniuses. I certainly didn't belong there on pure merit, but circumstances permitted it (mine was often, in effect, the student chair in the group).

    Seeing genius up close changed the way I think about ability. Around here, they're called "one of those guys". We know who they are. Sure, they put in the work, but in their backgrounds you can see a record of musical success, like Collier's, in their mid teens -- before they were alive long enough to put in the time that older but lesser players have. I'm convinced that it's extraordinary talent and not just anybody, in fact hardly anybody at all, can do it.

    There's a point in a disagreement where the participants drill down through the evidence to what I think of as the religion. The unshakable belief that can't be proved or disproved. Feels like we're at that point in this discussion. Thanks for participating. I think it's a good use of the forum.
    I don’t dispute this.

    This disagreement is that you don’t seem to think there is much to learn from those who exhibit traits of greatness; while I think there is a lot you can learn.

    Or that those who have that god given talent and have actually made something of it haven’t also worked very systematically and in great detail on aspects of their art. Because - as far as I can tell - they ALL have.

    maybe you don’t think that and I’m got the wrong end of the stick. But I’m enjoying digging into Chico’s playing.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-30-2020 at 03:43 PM.

  43. #242

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I don’t dispute this.

    This disagreement is that you don’t seem to think there is much to learn from those who exhibit traits of greatness; while I think there is a lot you can learn.

    Or that those who have that god given talent and have actually made something of it haven’t also worked very systematically and in great detail on aspects of their art. Because - as far as I can tell - they ALL have.

    maybe you don’t think that and I’m got the wrong end of the stick. But I’m enjoying digging into Chico’s playing.
    That isn't what I think. I have made an effort for years to get lessons from "those guys", and have profited from it. I'll come back to this point.

    As far as how the greats worked -- I'm confident that they all worked hard. I'm not so sure about the meaning of "systematically". Andres Varady is somebody I think about when this subject comes up. He made the cover of GP at 14 or so, and sounded great. In the interview he said he didn't know anything whatsoever about scales or any other theory. An ear player. Did he work "systematically"? Maybe in some way.

    Here's something about how those lessons with the greats made an impact.

    Occasionally, there would be a specific lesson that allowed me to move a step up the ladder. Learning about tonal centers. Learning how to move 4th voicings through major and melodic minor scales was one. Learning that 4th voicings could transcend the usual major or dominant being separate things, helped. Playing in the key of the 5th was another that comes to mind. Some of this didn't require a genius, I guess, but I got those things from players at that level.

    Then, there was the benefit of simply being able to jam with players who are (IMO) at a stratospheric level. It feels different. Occasionally, you can pick up a tidbit about why. Better listening, crisper rhythm, better ears, the ability to keep the underlying pulse in mind while spending minutes in rhythmic outer space. I recall hitting the last note of a tune -- and my note was kind of a clam. The keyboardist, a world class player, instantly played a chord that made my note sound brilliant. How do you teach that? Playing with musicians like that may have its biggest benefit in increasing one's awareness of what is possible and how it feels to be part of it.

    Another experience -- with some world class players (names some of you would know) I called a tune I knew well. I even had the chart in front of me, although I didn't need it. The tune was Samba Novo, which is fast, but has pretty simple changes.

    They took the tune into the further reaches of outer space. I couldn't tell where the time was, I got lost in a tune I knew well, and eventually, they all landed precisely together. The bassist told me later (although he might have been being generous) that he wasn't sure where they were either. His advice for coming back in together "keep your ears open".

    To sum up: of course you can learn from them and of course they worked. But there are levels that you can't reach just from hard work. There is such a thing as a gift.

  44. #243

    User Info Menu

    There is such a thing. I kind of chilled about all of that. It’s great some people are so badass. If I spent my time thinking about the vastly superior musical abilities of my colleagues id never have the confidence to play any gigs.

    I’m not saying it ain’t awesome to experience up close and a wonderful thing. Human potential is amazing.

    but perhaps I’m reading between the lines to much, or even projecting something, but ... it seems intimidating to you in some way?

    What interests me as a player as what I can do today with the situation I’m in rather than comparing myself to someone else and despairing at ever reaching that level. (Everyone does that form time to time btw lol)

    It’s just not good to do that... charting personal growth and development is so much more healthy, and revelling in the excellence of those you might get to make music with.

    And focussing outwards on music is always rewarding. Anyone I know who is any good at jazz has done that. Doesn’t matter how talented they are.

    ———

    Some of it you can’t teach or systematise it’s true. Some shit you have to systematise and you can teach. (God grant me the wisdom to know the difference.)

    and why do you keep asking ‘how do you teach’? Wrong question.

    ‘How do you learn?’ Is better question.

    also a lot of great players and great humans are not great at teaching. Teaching is HARD. You have to shed and study it even if you have it in your blood. Like music. And you have to know your limits. A lot of it is knowing when and what not to teach. Holding back on knowledge, clarifying, organising a path.

    Impossible to do here.

    However, in general the music has a way of teaching you what you need if you are open to it.

    tbf I’ve only had about five or six jazz guitar lessons in my life so I’m used to being a self starter. Might have been easier if I’d had a regular teacher, but I’m rarely pushed for things to work on lol.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-30-2020 at 07:17 PM.

  45. #244
    Words of wisdom, christianm77.

  46. #245

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    There is such a thing. I kind of chilled about all of that. It’s great some people are so badass. If I spent my time thinking about the vastly superior musical abilities of my colleagues id never have the confidence to play any gigs.

    I’m not saying it ain’t awesome to experience up close and a wonderful thing. Human potential is amazing.

    but perhaps I’m reading between the lines to much, or even projecting something, but ... it seems intimidating to you in some way?

    What interests me as a player as what I can do today with the situation I’m in rather than comparing myself to someone else and despairing at ever reaching that level. (Everyone does that form time to time btw lol)

    It’s just not good to do that... charting personal growth and development is so much more healthy, and revelling in the excellence of those you might get to make music with.

    And focussing outwards on music is always rewarding. Anyone I know who is any good at jazz has done that. Doesn’t matter how talented they are.

    ———

    Some of it you can’t teach or systematise it’s true. Some shit you have to systematise and you can teach. (God grant me the wisdom to know the difference.)

    and why do you keep asking ‘how do you teach’? Wrong question.

    ‘How do you learn?’ Is better question.

    also a lot of great players and great humans are not great at teaching. Teaching is HARD. You have to shed and study it even if you have it in your blood. Like music. And you have to know your limits. A lot of it is knowing when and what not to teach. Holding back on knowledge, clarifying, organising a path.

    Impossible to do here.

    However, in general the music has a way of teaching you what you need if you are open to it.

    tbf I’ve only had about five or six jazz guitar lessons in my life so I’m used to being a self starter. Might have been easier if I’d had a regular teacher, but I’m rarely pushed for things to work on lol.
    Some of it is just turning ideas over. Within that, is the search for the best way to improve.

    I like reading this forum and it's interesting to hear how some fine players think about the process of developing greater ability.

    What can challenging is being able to identify those ideas which might be helpful in my particular journey.

    As far as comparing to others -- it is awe inspiring to be near genius. But, I tend to think of it in terms of my calligrapher metaphor. I am not going to be able to make elaborate oil paintings. But, calligraphy, with its single color, is also art. So, I try to focus on using the tools I have as well as I can. As far as developing new tools -- I desire it, but I also see a risk of getting too scattered because of the multitude of options.

    As far as the question of "how do you teach?" ... if you're getting paid for it and, as some have done, touted it, I think it's fair question.

  47. #246

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Some of it is just turning ideas over. Within that, is the search for the best way to improve.

    I like reading this forum and it's interesting to hear how some fine players think about the process of developing greater ability.

    What can challenging is being able to identify those ideas which might be helpful in my particular journey.

    As far as comparing to others -- it is awe inspiring to be near genius. But, I tend to think of it in terms of my calligrapher metaphor. I am not going to be able to make elaborate oil paintings. But, calligraphy, with its single color, is also art. So, I try to focus on using the tools I have as well as I can. As far as developing new tools -- I desire it, but I also see a risk of getting too scattered because of the multitude of options.

    As far as the question of "how do you teach?" ... if you're getting paid for it and, as some have done, touted it, I think it's fair question.
    one of the worst traps you can call into as a teacher is try and give value for money haha. Esp with someone as verbose as yours truly.

    in all seriousness adult learners always think they need information. That if they find the right info they’ll get better.

    What they often need is be told how to work on shit, what to focus on and how to apply what they know. My job is rarely to give information. If the internet has shown anything it’s that teaching isn’t mere transmission of ideas and concepts.

    Furthermore a teacher has to encourage self directed learning. Transmission model teaching inhibits this by creating a dependency. Often it’s all I can do in a lesson to get a student to actually try something on their instrument rather than talking about it lol.

    So there are various models that educators use to get out of this, such as critical pedagogy where lessons are focussed on problem solving and the dynamic is much more two way. I like this approach. students are not merely empty vessels to filled up with info. Another is experiential learning and so on.

    it seems to me a lot jazzers (teachers but also crucially, students) are very unsophisticated when it comes to pedagogy. Students quite often have their expectations of how a lesson will go and what it will look like.

    Musicians usually teach in the way that they were taught. Sometimes that’s a good thing, but not always... but that’s fair enough as they are mostly concerned with being bad ass players, so even where they are excellent communicators it can be a bit old school and one way.
    I was myself before I started to seriously study it. It can be just a massive info dump. Not that info is a bad thing itself. But I can critique just about every lesson or workshop I’ve had with a world class player in terms of teaching technique, while at the same time valuing these experiences very greatly. (Obviously these interactions shouldn’t always be judged by the standards of formal education.)

    As I say, their main job is to be badass at music. People want the badassery to be explained in words of one syllable. Sometimes one can gain insights that way, but how can someone explain 20 years or more of their life - whatever it took them to get to their level?

    (of course one of the main reasons to go to a famous player for a lesson is simply to get a chance to play with them. Experiential learning....)
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-31-2020 at 04:55 AM.

  48. #247

    User Info Menu

    F major over the whole mess, and add a C# when you’re on A7 (which renders it an F major bebop scale)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  49. #248

    User Info Menu

    over Em7b5. A7
    i tried that BH thing last night
    playing C7 scale from Bb down to C#

    like Bb A G F E D C#
    if that’s correct ?

    to me that’s the G7 gypsy scale (or 5th mode of D harmonic minor)

    is that correct ?

  50. #249
    Yes, broadly speaking. But it’s in an ideal inversion and has a secret Bb in it.

    Going up it’s
    CDEFGABb then back down to C#
    Last edited by rintincop; 03-31-2020 at 11:53 AM.

  51. #250
    Ahh man! Stop worrying about scales! That’s all theory. Just look at the arps play them
    In all directions and you are good! Then use embellishments on the 3rds and 7ths-
    If you transcribe a bit you will see that’s what the masters do. No one plays scales man.
    Another thing mAke sure you play the arp and that will give you the flat 9. That’s all the jazz theory you need to know. Now come up with 4 years worth exercises.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk