-
Yea ... Warren type I chords are chords constructed on the "First Degree of the Major Scale"
I Major Chordas
Imaj7, Imaj6, Imaj9, Imaj69
I Minor Chords
Imin, Imin6, Imin7, Imin9
His type I chords Function as "Tonic" or "home base", so if your into Function or Family type names...your in.
Anyway... chords without a 11th
He calls Major type chords constructed on the Fifth Degree of the Maj Scale ...Type V tonic chords... and they're all interchangeable and demand resolution to a Type I chord. (except when you get to his Jazz Blues) (again what a shock)
Dom. 7th resolve to Type I Chords or move in cycles of 5ths and Dom.7th chords are also usually preceded by a Type II Chord.... (what a shock).
Type II Chords
Min chords constructed on the Second Degree of the Maj Scale , all of then, and as Warren states, In Jazz Type Two Chords .... Function as an alternate for the IV Chord. And again the normal progression of type II Chords is to the V Type Chord or the I Type Chord. (again what a shock)
He also calls -7b5 chords either, 1) a Min 6th chord or a NR 7th chord A-7b5 is C-6 is NR F9 is A-7b5, and C-6 can be Type I Chord on 1st degree of minor scale or NR Type V chord.
Dim. and Aug. (WT) are passing chords.
-
03-04-2020 01:00 PM
-
Reading all of the comments and responses above it seems that somewhere along the line the idea of playing to the melody got lost and the theorists hijacked jazz. Nearly all of the comments have intellectualized the function of jazz and the function of improvisation. These are precisely the conversations and elitism that frighten new players away from jazz and away from wanting to learn to improvise. Theory is simply a tool, no player is thinking in terms of modes or scales when playing live, it's happening too fast.
I read interviews in guitar publications that go something like "So, in the second verse you decided to go lydian instead of the more common ionian until the third measure when you shifted to locrian and then back to ionian, what was your thought process?"
The artist, not having a clue what the interviewer was saying, answers with the ambiguous "Yeah, that's right, I mean like Dude, it's all about change, right?"
But unfortunately thousands of budding guitarists are going to throw up their hands in frustration because we have over-intellectualized the process of MAKING MUSIC.
I didn't see a single comment that said play to the melody, play to the song, all I read was theory and math, no chemistry.
I read a story about a very famous jazz leader interviewing a young musician for his orchestra and at some point the young man said "I am a great sight reader" to which the leader said "Son, no one can hear you reading"
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
It still doesn’t swing
-
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
Chopin swings too
-
Originally Posted by sundogg52
Melodies are good.
TBH if you learn enough songs with changes as, well standard, as .... er .... standards you are going to come up with a theory of how these chords move and how people soloing on them approach them anyway. Unless you are thick, of course. But actually capable jazz musicians tend not to be thick in my experience, probably for that reason.
-
It’s all going on all the time
melody isn’t lost, we’re just talking about chord types. And when your actually performing, Rhythm will trump almost anything
(no relationship to US F**** U* Pres
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
-
Some more Warren Nunes stuff.
I have several of his books on my shelf, so I pulled them out for the first time in years.
In "Rhythm and Background Chords", Warren described "I Type Chords" as Reg reported (page 8).
He talks about "V Type Chords" on page 48. Again, as Reg described.
On Page 78, he discusses "II Type Chords" and mentions that they function "as an alternative to the IV chord".
There are lots of examples of progressions, including some very cool voicings.
In the actual lessons (in person, the old-fashioned way), for soloing, he spoke of this differently. Only two types and interchangeable within a type.
He taught tonal centers. In "Jazz Guitar Solos" he presents a bunch of standards with tonal centers sketched in. I still have my handwritten notes showing all the interchangeable chords (within a type) in the book.
In "Jazz Guitar Chord Bible" there is a huge number of ii V Is and similar sequences using a lot of different voicings.
BTW, he also wrote a bass book.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
I got a comfy chair and some mandala coloring pages in my classroom, if anybody needs.
-
The Mark Levine books chord/scale method for ii V I in minor is awkward. It consist of the scales: the Locian #2 scale on the ii, the Altered scale on the V7, and the "Minor Major" scale on the i.
ii V in usually last for a measure (2 beats each chord) in minor and in major too, do you really think it's at all practical to think of two different scales for 2 beats each? Barry Harris has a better system for that. Harris basically thinks of a single scale for a ii V.
-
Originally Posted by rintincop
-
Think diatonic —> connection —> destination chord
this can all happen in the space of a few notes.
So Barry might be thinking, for example
V (or bVII) dominant —> diminished connection —> destination chord
-
Of course, but Mr. Levine does not mention such a practical application.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
On D-7b5 G7 practice/play Bb7 for Ab down to B
-
Originally Posted by rintincop
ii dorian
V half-whole
I ionian
would be the same type of thing, but to be honest I find the system too.... choicey. Barry gives exact specific things to play that sound like jazz and Levine talks mostly about the harmonic implications of seven notes scale iirc (diminished and whole tone excepted)
I find the seven note thing very arbitrary. Why not six, eight or nine? The half whole scale sits awkwardly here among the seven note modes.
-
Originally Posted by rintincop
you can always swap one of those in for a IIm7
-
Yes, Levine's method is too cerebral.
-
Barry Harris bVII method
for | D-7b5 | G7b9 |
Play Bb7 for Ab down to B... then maybe up the important diminished ... the maybe down the Augmented Arp
-
Originally Posted by rintincop
Levine teaches a harmonic theory, ultimately. Barry teaches phrases and ideas that sound legitimate and can be combined into longer statements. The harmony is sort of secondary.
using Levine style CST to teach beginners to improvise is obviously never going to work very well. Everyone kind of knows this and yet they do it anyway.
-
Originally Posted by rintincop
Thats the simplest. There are other connections you can make too, obviously. Tritone is a big one.
-
I agree.
The Mark Levine books will not much help a student to improvise melodically, but instead improvise mechanically. He does not really teach "improvisation" in a melodic sense. Voicings are what he lectures on. His chord/scale method for ii V I in minor is awkward. It consist of the scales: the Locian #2 scale on the ii, the Altered scale on the V7, and the "Minor Major" scale on the i.
ii V in usually last for a measure (2 beats each chord) in minor and in major too, do you really think it's at all practical to think of two different scales for 2 beats each? Barry Harris has a better system for that. He think of single scales for ii V.
The Unwritten Theory of Guitar Harmolodics
Today, 07:33 PM in Guitar Technique