Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Posts 151 to 200 of 298
  1. #151

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Here’s an initial Jordan Klemons style approach to this. I’m doing his thing of taking the melody notes and extending the chords up to them. That’s why bar 1 is Fm9 here, not Fm11. The melody note is the extension used in all these voicings, hence the difference with the real book. They don’t necessary represent the way Herbie for instance voiced them.

    once that’s done, I unpack the appropriate major or minor triad, and add a tension tone, usually a note from the seventh chord not represented in the triad.
    this thing

    One way of thinking about Non Functional Harmony-52b5ccd4-eea2-48c4-9953-d454fe2e572f-jpeg

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #152

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    . 1. (eg what resources can we use to solo on a Wayne tune?
    2. How can we write music that sounds like Wayne?) as opposed to aesthetic music theory
    3. (why do Wayne’s progressions sound beautiful and can we construct a theory to explain this?)
    4. I find papers of this kind demonstrate this distinction pretty well:
    Christian since you seem interested.
    1. all the normal devices, and a several tricks one can hear or knows, what the sounds are, example melodic minor is key not cadence based it does have V to i
    the movement is determined by the bass note. Most chords are interchangeable. This does not mean W Shorters stuff is all M Minor, it is just to show how what appears to be perhaps unconnected chords/progressions. are or can be in a tonal are KEY. My father's Post #1 EbMaj7#5 to Amin9 started this . meaning once you hear (preferably ) oe see the logic, it helps one enormously as one continues down this path. Remember the majority of swing players 40's had to learn the new language of Bebop, many did not and stayed within Swing idiom.

    2. You cant really unless you employ the language, no different from say Allan Holdsworth ( with shorter there are many and more who are similar to him, as opposed to Alan H. ) because there are many post composers does not mean they are all good, similar to say pop bands in 60's take the Beatles, who could write melodies, they had the gift for melody. (Shorter has the gift. of Harmony and Melody)

    3. yes they are, i dont think it is possible for a theory. but my father showed me some amazing stuff. making chords flow into one another, without all the regular 1 6 2 5 or blues 1 4 5 or D7 G7 C7 F7 or other progression There does not seem to be a logic the chords seem not to be connected. They .are connected, by sound they all flow into one another, it is a form of voiceleading, except it is not cadenced based, ( it can obviously have elements or even a V I but i mean mostly.

    4. You probably would, given your Academic background. in the book you mention we have that somewhere, its a Mindscrew very technical theory when they start with the Hyper acoustic BS. it is usually some convoluted L Chromatic Concept, plain old Lydian Dominant scale a mixolydian scale with #4 yes all the natural overtones in it.

    In essence stuff is for theorists, try laying that on Jimmy Bruno, your ears would burn, love Jimmy in your face.

    Back to Shorter and the gang, even Corea they use systems, that are a departure from say Moon Blue standards, but also use (B Moon) then you get to Stella a step beyond Blue Moon,
    Take the A section of Blue Moon shove in Stellas bars 17-25 | G7#5#9 % | Cm6/9 CminMaj9 EbM7#5 | Ab7b5 D7#9 | BbM % | point being its still Blue Moon and part of Stella reharmed, poor example i know,

    Christian If you did not see my post on Chromatic Tritones have a look for Leonard Berstein link regrading Debussy, i am sure you will enjoy it,


  4. #153

    User Info Menu

    I don’t really like Debussy

    besides Wayne’s favourite composer is Vaughan Williams

  5. #154

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I don’t really like Debussy
    Me neither... thought I admit he is a genius. I just do not like him
    I also do not liek Leonard Bernstein (he is not even genius).

  6. #155

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    Just got this book today, this thread got me interested to know more about Shorter’s compositions and this looks promising. Contains quite a lot of transcriptions.

    That will keep you quite for a while......................................... very interesting book, although light on Shorters stuff. My fathers has a lot of this subject matter.
    It has been said Shorter handed out leasdsheets, at sessions etc, they were normally taken back after. This i can believe especially after being around Miles.
    Although he maybe seemed meek and mild, Shorter was shrewd, He kept his publishing, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. I dont blame him.

    Miles Davis made lots of money, he hardly wrote a thing.
    .

  7. #156

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by marvinvv
    Christian since you seem interested.
    1. all the normal devices, and a several tricks one can hear or knows, what the sounds are, example melodic minor is key not cadence based it does have V to i
    the movement is determined by the bass note. Most chords are interchangeable. This does not mean W Shorters stuff is all M Minor, it is just to show how what appears to be perhaps unconnected chords/progressions. are or can be in a tonal are KEY. My father's Post #1 EbMaj7#5 to Amin9 started this . meaning once you hear (preferably ) oe see the logic, it helps one enormously as one continues down this path. Remember the majority of swing players 40's had to learn the new language of Bebop, many did not and stayed within Swing idiom.

    2. You cant really unless you employ the language, no different from say Allan Holdsworth ( with shorter there are many and more who are similar to him, as opposed to Alan H. ) because there are many post composers does not mean they are all good, similar to say pop bands in 60's take the Beatles, who could write melodies, they had the gift for melody. (Shorter has the gift. of Harmony and Melody)

    3. yes they are, i dont think it is possible for a theory. but my father showed me some amazing stuff. making chords flow into one another, without all the regular 1 6 2 5 or blues 1 4 5 or D7 G7 C7 F7 or other progression There does not seem to be a logic the chords seem not to be connected. They .are connected, by sound they all flow into one another, it is a form of voiceleading, except it is not cadenced based, ( it can obviously have elements or even a V I but i mean mostly.

    4. You probably would, given your Academic background. in the book you mention we have that somewhere, its a Mindscrew very technical theory when they start with the Hyper acoustic BS. it is usually some convoluted L Chromatic Concept, plain old Lydian Dominant scale a mixolydian scale with #4 yes all the natural overtones in it.

    In essence stuff is for theorists, try laying that on Jimmy Bruno, your ears would burn, love Jimmy in your face.

    Back to Shorter and the gang, even Corea they use systems, that are a departure from say Moon Blue standards, but also use (B Moon) then you get to Stella a step beyond Blue Moon,
    Take the A section of Blue Moon shove in Stellas bars 17-25 | G7#5#9 % | Cm6/9 CminMaj9 EbM7#5 | Ab7b5 D7#9 | BbM % | point being its still Blue Moon and part of Stella reharmed, poor example i know,

    Christian If you did not see my post on Chromatic Tritones have a look for Leonard Berstein link regrading Debussy, i am sure you will enjoy it,

    OK, I'll put it more directly, since you seem to think I am saying something I am not.

    IMO 1 and 2 are worth looking into while the study of 3. is a rabbit hole as evidenced by the bullshit presented in 4.

    Cool?

    EDIT: actually I think you get this. TBH this is where the discussion kind of ends for me. I don't feel a theory for why Wayne's harmony sounds good is necessary exactly, but we can recognise patterns and ideas that Wayne uses from piece to piece and this may be helpful. The kind of theory most useful to a jazz musician is to understand recurring patterns in songs etc and how material can be applied on them.

  8. #157

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jonah
    me neither... Thought i admit he is a genius. I just do not like him
    i also do not liek leonard bernstein (he is not even genius).
    yes!

  9. #158

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I don’t really like Debussy

    You dont have to like him, it purely to link up how Shorter stuff relates to non functional and Debussy was using this, explained by someone LB who i think does a great job.
    in explaining. Get to the part in the video where goes from Emaj to EbM dominant maybe it will make sense,


    So just you take that or leave it, Stay at home, go on holiday. Visit all you can from 2m, Work if you shouldn't.

  10. #159

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by marvinvv
    You dont have to like him, it purely to link up how Shorter stuff relates to non functional and Debussy was using this, explained by someone LB who i think does a great job.
    in explaining. Get to the part in the video where goes from Emaj to EbM dominant maybe it will make sense,


    So just you take that or leave it, Stay at home, go on holiday. Visit all you can from 2m, Work if you shouldn't.
    TBH I'm not feeling the need. I'm sure it's cool. I just find it a bit dry and academic looking :-)

  11. #160

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    OK, I'll put it more directly, since you seem to think I am saying something I am not.

    IMO 1 and 2 are worth looking into while the study of 3. is a rabbit hole as evidenced by the bullshit presented in 4.

    Cool?
    was not intending to be rude at all,
    the 3 part if you dont see, is how seemingly unconnected stuff is in fact connected,

    4. a lot in that book you mentioned NOT ME is heavy theory, as i said huge fucking words for what is only a lydian dominant scale,

    then you get upset at me you mentioned the Book, i know i read half of it my Dad has it.its mindscrew, i merely though you were interested, otherwise why mention, it certainly not a regular music book,

    Lets not be unpleasant, was just mentioning some stuff

  12. #161

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by marvinvv
    was not intending to be rude at all,
    the 3 part if you dont see, is how seemingly unconnected stuff is in fact connected,

    4. a lot in that book you mentioned NOT ME is heavy theory, as i said huge fucking words for what is only a lydian dominant scale,

    then you get upset at me you mentioned the Book, i know i read half of it my Dad has it.its mindscrew, i merely though you were interested, otherwise why mention, it certainly not a regular music book,

    Lets not be unpleasant, was just mentioning some stuff
    I’m not upset. What book btw? I’m confused.

    EDIT: The book graham was talking about? Sorry I think I missed that context. On my own riff.
    Last edited by christianm77; 05-12-2020 at 12:48 PM.

  13. #162

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    OK, I'll put it more directly, since you seem to think I am saying something I am not.

    IMO 1 and 2 are worth looking into while the study of 3. is a rabbit hole as evidenced by the bullshit presented in 4.

    Cool?

    EDIT: actually I think you get this. TBH this is where the discussion kind of ends for me. I don't feel a theory for why Wayne's harmony sounds good is necessary exactly, but we can recognise patterns and ideas that Wayne uses from piece to piece and this may be helpful. The kind of theory most useful to a jazz musician is to understand recurring patterns in songs etc and how material can be applied on them.
    also I don’t know if you saw my edit.

    anyway, don’t worry about my feelings.... It’s all cool. Sometimes I argue in a very direct way that can come across as angry in text. usually I’m just having at it. sometimes I’m joking. If the forum starts to affect me on an emotional level I go away for a bit.

    anyway all the best, difficult times.

  14. #163

    User Info Menu

    Yea... so Marvin generally if you expand one aspect of something... you open the doors of expanding more aspects.
    What I'm getting at is....say the Cadence thing. I hear lots of cadences... I just have expanded the function of cadence... I have always thought of Wayne's tunes as blocks of harmony, (I'm leaving the melody and rhythmic aspect out for the moment... I understand their function etc...but we're talking about harmonic Function), so if you have a chord pattern, then create a secondary pattern from that original Chord Pattern... using standard subs from all the common practice Jazz Harmony sources.
    1) maj/min functional harmonic practice... and the expanded version
    2)Jazz modal Functional Harmonic practice... Modal interchange
    3)Root motions created from above, which become Chord Patterns... meaning they can have..
    A) one or a single function, (all the chords imply a single tonal target and function)
    B) a tonal target and function of.. one of the chords in the Chord Pattern, and expanded to the implied Tonal Target of any of the chords in the Chord Pattern... (even if the chord isn't in the chord pattern).
    3) Pedal Points ... generally bottom of chords or chord patterns, but can also be in Middle, top. Double pedal points etc...they create an effect of suspension of Function. You then have expanded usage chord movement above them...
    4) Contiguous harmonic patterns... like use of II V's, constant structures etc...
    5) Multi-Tonic organizations

    I could go on, but the point is ...expanding applications of standard musical organization. yes we all know how Romantics and on and on also use these musical organizational practices... but what they didn't use was Blue Note harmonic organizations created from above musical organizations and their expansions. And the expanded functional use of M.M. and Blue Notes for functional organization. It's a door that just wasn't opened... Scriabin took a peak... but the practice just wasn't part of compositional and performance practice.

    Sorry... I can go on but enough is enough.
    Was cool to see your father's chart... thanks.

    I'm pretty sure Wayne didn't use Dim. for some of those changes. He usually would use the typical Locrian and HM expanded and then the MM sub of the V's or II V chord patterns.

    Yes and No is great tune... haven't played in last 20+ years at least... I'll make vid.... I do remember... the tune was burnin... better take off the coat.

  15. #164

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Yea... so Marvin generally if you expand one aspect of something... you open the doors of expanding more aspects.
    What I'm getting at is....say the Cadence thing. I hear lots of cadences... I just have expanded the function of cadence... I have always thought of Wayne's tunes as blocks of harmony, (I'm leaving the melody and rhythmic aspect out for the moment... I understand their function etc...but we're talking about harmonic Function), so if you have a chord pattern, then create a secondary pattern from that original Chord Pattern... using standard subs from all the common practice Jazz Harmony sources.
    1) maj/min functional harmonic practice... and the expanded version
    2)Jazz modal Functional Harmonic practice... Modal interchange
    3)Root motions created from above, which become Chord Patterns... meaning they can have..
    A) one or a single function, (all the chords imply a single tonal target and function)
    B) a tonal target and function of.. one of the chords in the Chord Pattern, and expanded to the implied Tonal Target of any of the chords in the Chord Pattern... (even if the chord isn't in the chord pattern).
    3) Pedal Points ... generally bottom of chords or chord patterns, but can also be in Middle, top. Double pedal points etc...they create an effect of suspension of Function. You then have expanded usage chord movement above them...
    4) Contiguous harmonic patterns... like use of II V's, constant structures etc...
    5) Multi-Tonic organizations

    I could go on, but the point is ...expanding applications of standard musical organization. yes we all know how Romantics and on and on also use these musical organizational practices... but what they didn't use was Blue Note harmonic organizations created from above musical organizations and their expansions. And the expanded functional use of M.M. and Blue Notes for functional organization. It's a door that just wasn't opened... Scriabin took a peak... but the practice just wasn't part of compositional and performance practice.

    Sorry... I can go on but enough is enough.
    Was cool to see your father's chart... thanks.

    I'm pretty sure Wayne didn't use Dim. for some of those changes. He usually would use the typical Locrian and HM expanded and then the MM sub of the V's or II V chord patterns.

    Yes and No is great tune... haven't played in last 20+ years at least... I'll make vid.... I do remember... the tune was burnin... better take off the coat.
    I transcribed a couple of chorus of Yes and No over a decade ago - this was my first real contact with dominant bebop language, and I remember thinking 'oh that's how you use the bebop scale' when I heard it. I was also struck by Wayne's use of pentatonic modes and the fact that the solo was full of well, straight stepwise descending scales. Like the ones teachers tell you not to play lol.

    So I learned my first Barry Harris style stuff from Wayne haha! Mostly it's straight bop language for the II-V sections.

    I'm not sure Wayne is much of a melodic minor guy TBH. I think he leaves that shit to Herbie. Diminished - maybe. Again I need to transcribe his stuff more. He gets a lot of pentatonic stuff out of the Coltrane playbook, a lot of descending chromatic things. It's not always easy to say what scale or whatever he is playing. As I say a lot of his stuff is elaborations of the melody. Obviously this tune gave him a lot of opportunity to play his canned bop language, but he was moving away from that. He doesn't even do that in the bridge of Speak no Evil.

    Yes and No is kind of ... unusually boppy?
    Last edited by christianm77; 05-12-2020 at 05:36 PM.

  16. #165

    User Info Menu

    I haven't spent enough time with Shorter's music. I play Ana Maria, for example, which doesn't seem all that different from tunes that I understand are considered "functional" by people who know more theory than I do.

    I find Iris, to take another example, to not fall into any established patterns or resolutions. I don't have any techniques or tricks to apply, beyond knowledge of chord tones, extensions and tensions and adjusting the problem notes by ear. I haven't any idea what Shorter was thinking -- and I suspect (without knowledge) that he heard a melody and found chords by ear -- and we're all searching for a pattern in what he heard in his mind.

    One thing I do on tunes with harmony that I don't understand is to simply strum the chords until I can hear the tune in my mind. That helps.

    I have no contribution to make to the theoretical discussion, apart from noting that some of Wayne's tunes are more adventurous than others.

  17. #166

    User Info Menu

    yea Christian...

    All true... the MM reference is his basic use of sub V's and 1/2 step played or implied lines. he also uses that #11 to bounce or Modal interchange with Lydian and Lydian b7... back in the late 60's and even into early 70's the bVI chord and bII chord tonalities were interchanged a lot during improv... both oped the Blue Door if one wished to go there, it also at least implied ...which also interchanged with that II V thing.... Dorian- Mixo or MM -Lydian b7 or Lydian Dominant and all the interchange options. It wasn't hip to play to much Blue references... but most still had all those feels in their heads... and the implication of or camouflage of....always help with the audience connection and feels.
    Part of that making non-functional harmony/improv still have a connection. Jazz without Blue reference is cold and just too vanilla... I'm somewhat making fun of... but not all audiences are that hip...

  18. #167

    User Info Menu

    "he heard a melody and found chords by ear"
    bingo!
    or the other way around
    he found some chords and made a melody

    Reject traditional jazz chords; react to Coltrane, Ornette and Cecil Taylor. Innovate, loosen structure, treat each "chord" as an independent episode for improvisation, "flow of consciousness", abstract art...etc

    Last edited by rintincop; 05-12-2020 at 09:37 PM.

  19. #168

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    "he heard a melody and found chords by ear"
    bingo!
    or the other way around
    he found some chords and made a melody

    It's really simple.

    I have no idea how Wayne Shorter wrote Iris. But, I tried this.

    I approached the chart by asking myself, "if this was a really fancy reharm, what would the vanilla chords be?"

    So, I started with Cm7/F.

    then Bb7 (played over E in the chart)

    Then Bbm9 Bb Db F Ab C (chart chord is Gb Bb C F, which isn't all that different)

    Then Bb7

    So far, I've got all but one of the melody notes, the F#, and his chord does not have it either. Bass line seems to be moving down in half or whole steps.

    Abm9 is next (for Db7#11) and then C/Ab.

    After that he's got a Cm7 moving to Db7#11, which is pretty much a Cminmaj with an F in the melody.

    Last three chords are substantially Abmmaj - like. Half step movement.

    So, I can imagine he had a melody and an idea where the harmony should begin and then let his imagination run. Every time he can to something which seemed obvious, he disguised it.

    Not a criticism. Innovative and beautiful. Tune emerges from the subconscious, like it should.

    Theorists bring up the rear.

  20. #169

    User Info Menu

    Can’t sleep. This is a piece of Vaughan Williams that Wayne picked out, featuring a prominent solo for tenor sax. If you only know Lark Ascending (which Wayne also digs) it might surprise you.



    Put those two pieces together (the floating sus chords and pentatonic/modal lines of the Lark and the VW thing starts to make sense I think.)

  21. #170

    User Info Menu

    Put those two pieces together (the floating sus chords and pentatonic/modal lines of the Lark and the VW thing starts to make sense I think.)
    Thank you... interesting really

    interesting how jazz musicians often treat and hear classical music from - sort of - outside?

    To me it is sometimes like they look at the painting of Rembrandt and see just some abstract 'light and shadow' composition...

    Debussy and some other composers and composition (like that Lark you refer to or some Stravinsky or Sibelius works for example) may seem to be sort of the bridge -- but it is deceptive too... it seems like jazzers catch the fragments of melodic contour and colours of the moment often

  22. #171

    User Info Menu

    "he heard a melody and found chords by ear"
    bingo!
    or the other way around
    he found some chords and made a melody

    Reject traditional jazz chords; react to Coltrane, Ornette and Cecil Taylor. Innovate, loosen structure, treat each "chord" as an independent episode for improvisation, "flow of consciousness", abstract art...etc
    I noticed that if I articulate some improvized melody with conviction I can put almost any clash of notes under it... it drives it on anyways...

  23. #172

    User Info Menu

    Yes, Jonah, it's called playing rubbish. It's not good music and it's not jazz. Jazz - in fact, any type of music - only works when you know exactly what you're doing and why. You can fool some of the people some of the time...

    One is rubbish, one is acceptable:


  24. #173

    User Info Menu

    Jazz - in fact, any type of music - only works when you know exactly what you're doing and why.
    No. It only begins when you stop knowing

  25. #174

    User Info Menu

    That may apply to mysticism but not to music :-)

  26. #175

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    That may apply to mysticism but not to music :-)
    i don’t understand this distinction.

  27. #176

    User Info Menu

    The 'mystical' view is that for truth, or the unknown, to appear the mind must be free of the past, which is knowledge; it has to be in a state of unknowing.

    Musically, if we were in a state of unknowing when trying to negotiate Stella By Starlight, we'd soon be out of a job

  28. #177

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    The 'mystical' view is that for truth, or the unknown, to appear the mind must be free of the past, which is knowledge; it has to be in a state of unknowing.

    Musically, if we were in a state of unknowing when trying to negotiate Stella By Starlight, we'd soon be out of a job
    Wayne Shorter is a Zen Buddhist. AFAIK that’s very much how he looks at it.

    Don’t we all want to be in a state of unknowing when playing music? That’s the best stuff. Everything else is just prep.

  29. #178

    User Info Menu

    Yes, I know all that but one has to be careful. There has to a certain abandonment when soloing over any tune. Someone who is playing by rote is merely imitating, which isn't creative. As you say, there has to be a certain absence of conscious deliberation but that only works when the prep has been thoroughly done, not just for that one tune but over years of playing.

  30. #179

    User Info Menu

    Wayne Shorter is a Zen Buddhist.
    It is interesting...

    I am definitely a fundamental christian culturally...

    I remember I once discussed one famous quote from Faulkner: Between grief and nothing I will take grief.
    My friend - a Buddhist - really did not get it... but for me it was obvious and natural.

    that is why probably i sometimes feel too lose and frustrated when I listen to 'zen-ish' stuff in modern jazz (sometimes Frisell sounds like that but not always)... I need some kind of flesh and blood in art, intentsity of interaction between spiritual and material... and some suffering probably too.

    That is why Bill does some things sometime taht seem too loose to me... but he just feel relaxed and has fun.
    And I am just not capable

    By the way Shorter mostly sounds very intensive to me...

    On the other hand mysticims is represented in any relisgion. Actually mysticim to me is the only really active part of religion - the mechanics that delivers, all the rest is contemplative or preparatory.

    And the Art is mysitc as well as act of creation.
    In christian reality the artist imitates God. What can be mor mystic?

  31. #180

    User Info Menu

    In Christian reality the artist imitates God
    We shouldn't really get into this on a music forum but, really, this is utterly confused. I don't mean to disparage anyone's beliefs but a moment's thought will tell us what's wrong with this sort of statement.

  32. #181

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Yes, I know all that but one has to be careful. There has to a certain abandonment when soloing over any tune. Someone who is playing by rote is merely imitating, which isn't creative. As you say, there has to be a certain absence of conscious deliberation but that only works when the prep has been thoroughly done, not just for that one tune but over years of playing.
    Well duh

  33. #182

    User Info Menu

    But then also - sometimes you just wing it and that can be good too. In practice if you are actually out there making music you don’t really have time to worry about that stuff. You have to get on with it.

    i think Wayne found Zen useful as a practical tool for this. It is a pretty practical philosophy in many ways.

  34. #183

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    We shouldn't really get into this on a music forum but, really, this is utterly confused. I don't mean to disparage anyone's beliefs but a moment's thought will tell us what's wrong with this sort of statement.
    It's about the act of creation.

  35. #184

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    It is interesting...

    I am definitely a fundamental christian culturally...

    I remember I once discussed one famous quote from Faulkner: Between grief and nothing I will take grief.
    My friend - a Buddhist - really did not get it... but for me it was obvious and natural.

    that is why probably i sometimes feel too lose and frustrated when I listen to 'zen-ish' stuff in modern jazz (sometimes Frisell sounds like that but not always)... I need some kind of flesh and blood in art, intentsity of interaction between spiritual and material... and some suffering probably too.

    That is why Bill does some things sometime taht seem too loose to me... but he just feel relaxed and has fun.
    And I am just not capable

    By the way Shorter mostly sounds very intensive to me...

    On the other hand mysticims is represented in any relisgion. Actually mysticim to me is the only really active part of religion - the mechanics that delivers, all the rest is contemplative or preparatory.

    And the Art is mysitc as well as act of creation.
    In christian reality the artist imitates God. What can be mor mystic?
    i disagree - I think the effect of art is separate from its cause. The emotional state in its creation is not relevant to its effect as art. And most musicians respond a meditative flow type state when making music - as if the music had arrived from elsewhere (an ancient understanding.)

    it was a Russian Christian who said ‘music is powerless to express anything at all.’

    This is true. But most people enjoy a social performance around the idea that it is not. That’s one of the big contracts you sign as a musician.

    If someone says ‘that was really moving, what was it about?’ it’s considered bad form to report: ‘I wasn’t really thinking anything.’

    but that statement is not meant to diminish the emotional reaction someone has. That’s real and genuine. It’s more that people would really rather not ponder the gaps between us all when they felt something that felt like a connection. So the illusion has value.

  36. #185

    User Info Menu

    Lol this thread has gone all metaphysical or pataphysical or something.

    Anyway it’s interesting that Shorter’s original lead sheet for Iris ended with a sort of functional turnaround (G7#9 then C9b5, implying a return to the Fm chord in bar 1), according to the book I mentioned. (By the way it has a detailed analysis of Iris, also a transcription of Wayne’s solo).

    In the actual recording of course, this was changed.

  37. #186

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
    It's about the act of creation.
    Cosmic, our gods are our creation. That is, we've invented them. Creation implies something new, not regurgitated.

  38. #187

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    Lol this thread has gone all metaphysical or pataphysical or something.
    Holy shit have you read an interview with Wayne? This is the shallows, baby.

    Anyway it’s interesting that Shorter’s original lead sheet for Iris ended with a sort of functional turnaround (G7#9 then C9b5, implying a return to the Fm chord in bar 1), according to the book I mentioned. (By the way it has a detailed analysis of Iris, also a transcription of Wayne’s solo).

    In the actual recording of course, this was changed.
    interesting. Miles was a great editor and adapter of material.

    The move bVI7 I is pretty functional too, just less obvious. You can probably think of dozens of standards that do that. Not so common in the last bar of a tune though, true.

  39. #188

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    it has a detailed analysis of Iris
    Anything revelatory?

    In the actual recording of course, this was changed
    Possibly for the better, actually. G7/C7 - (Fm) sounds a bit lame.

  40. #189

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Cosmic, our gods are our creation. That is, we've invented them. Creation implies something new, not regurgitated.
    use whatever terminology makes you comfortable, secular or spiritual. The subjective experience of creativity shows remarkable consistency across the arts and as far as can tell, culture.

  41. #190

    User Info Menu

    I'm not saying human beings can't be creative, of course they can. But for the most part they're not, as evidenced by the state of the world.

    Creation means something new brought into being. A mind steeped in its own particular culture producing works of art isn't necessarily creative; it's a form of re-invention. One isn't necessarily creative because one paints or plays an instrument.

    It depends on the state of mind. Out of an empty mind - that is, an unoccupied mind, not a vacant one - can come the most extraordinary things. But they have come out of it, they haven't been invented by it, and there's a great difference.

  42. #191

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Anything revelatory?
    well one interesting point is that the theme of Iris is 16 bars but in the recording they added 9 bars during the solos, based on the chords at double the rate, so the whole form becomes 25 bars. But Shorter did not stick to this on his second chorus, so when Hancock started his solo they were all a bit unsure where they were in the form, and it took a few bars for them to decide on a consensus. The book has a transcription of the first bars of Herbie’s solo and Ron Carter’s bass line, showing how they gradually get back in sync.

    I always thought Herbie’s solo starts a bit strangely, seems to sort of hang in the air as it were, until it gets going.

  43. #192

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Holy shit have you read an interview with Wayne? This is the shallows, baby.
    Yes I know Wayne is incomprehensible, hence Mr. Weird.

    Actually it’s a shame his ‘Footprints’ biography doesn’t say much (as I recall) about his ideas about composition etc. (or maybe the author couldn’t understand what he said!).

  44. #193

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    well one interesting point is that the theme of Iris is 16 bars but in the recording they added 9 bars during the solos, based on the chords at double the rate, so the whole form becomes 25 bars. But Shorter did not stick to this on his second chorus, so when Hancock started his solo they were all a bit unsure where they were in the form, and it took a few bars for them to decide on a consensus. The book has a transcription of the first bars of Herbie’s solo and Ron Carter’s bass line, showing how they gradually get back in sync.

    I always thought Herbie’s solo starts a bit strangely, seems to sort of hang in the air as it were, until it gets going.
    Good, they're not perfect then :-)

  45. #194

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Good, they're not perfect then :-)
    The book has quite a few examples of this sort of thing. I guess it was inevitable, as their process seemed to be: arrive at the studio, see the lead sheet for the first time, immediately start making group changes to the tune, record it and then Miles would usually go for the first complete take without any obvious train-wrecks.

    So they probably became very adept at immediately reacting to any mistakes/surprises and recovering from them.

    Plus these were 5 guys with some of the best ears and reflexes in the business!

  46. #195

    User Info Menu

    Absolutely. Presented with the recorded version of Iris, or most tunes, we just accept them as they are.

  47. #196

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    I'm not saying human beings can't be creative, of course they can. But for the most part they're not, as evidenced by the state of the world.

    Creation means something new brought into being. A mind steeped in its own particular culture producing works of art isn't necessarily creative; it's a form of re-invention. One isn't necessarily creative because one paints or plays an instrument.

    It depends on the state of mind. Out of an empty mind - that is, an unoccupied mind, not a vacant one - can come the most extraordinary things. But they have come out of it, they haven't been invented by it, and there's a great difference.
    interesting. examples?

  48. #197

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    The book has quite a few examples of this sort of thing. I guess it was inevitable, as their process seemed to be: arrive at the studio, see the lead sheet for the first time, immediately start making group changes to the tune, record it and then Miles would usually go for the first complete take without any obvious train-wrecks.

    So they probably became very adept at immediately reacting to any mistakes/surprises and recovering from them.

    Plus these were 5 guys with some of the best ears and reflexes in the business!
    i think Miles liked the freshness... also the mistakes too.

    I wonder sometimes if musicians don’t realise that the audience enjoys a bit of humanity in their music, a bit of imperfection.

  49. #198

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    Yes I know Wayne is incomprehensible, hence Mr. Weird.

    Actually it’s a shame his ‘Footprints’ biography doesn’t say much (as I recall) about his ideas about composition etc. (or maybe the author couldn’t understand what he said!).
    perhaps he’s not terribly interested in discussing it in that way.

  50. #199

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Creation implies something new, not regurgitated.
    My sympathies that your creativity is regurgitation.

  51. #200

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    i think Miles liked the freshness... also the mistakes too.

    I wonder sometimes if musicians don’t realise that the audience enjoys a bit of humanity in their music, a bit of imperfection.

    Yes, funny you should mention that, i been listening to Tal, and how sloppy he is sometimes, its great, love his playing i think Barney K is a bit like that , it gives the music as you say a bit of humanity, Listen to Miles @ plugged Nickle out of tune many times, but he just makes it into something else, amazing,