Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Posts 201 to 250 of 298
  1. #201

    User Info Menu

    I'm in the same camp as Reg. The whole non-functional thing disappears once you can hear the expansion of traditional tonal/modal relationships. I ultimately hear Iris centered around C with little soirees into the iv, bVI, and bII tonal areas. Personally, I'm not a fan of calling anything with a non-traditional progression"non-functional".Tonality has expanded since its conception... we're beyond the straight ahead ii-V-I's/IV-V-Is etc. You can have micro-tonalities nested within the overarching form/tonal structure.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #202

    User Info Menu

    That makes sense to me.

    As I say, there are common moves in Wayne tunes, and other post-bop and modern composers. The more music you learn the more accustomed to the sounds you become and the better you are at negotiating them.

    Im not convinced you need to know much more about it than that. However you classify them is just names really. Like ‘2 5 1’ is a label.

    Other than the melodies of Wayne’s tunes sometimes provide elegant and helpful routes through the changes.

  4. #203

    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.'


    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    interesting. examples?
    Of what? Non-creativity? Good lord, just look around.
    If you mean the empty mind thing, I haven't the slightest idea. Who knows?

    Creativity and the expressions of creativity are two different things. It's the state of mind that's important. A creative mind needn't necessarily express itself in art, literature, music, etc. And not everything which is expressed is necessarily born of creativity. Creativity essentially involves lack of self.

    The musician who plays with one eye on the music and the other on fame, money or adulation isn't a creative person. He may play very well but it's not done for the love of the thing itself.

  5. #204

    User Info Menu

    I think Wayne probably did it for the love of the thing itself but who's to judge?

  6. #205

    User Info Menu

    What might be behind this strange sequence?

    A7#11/G
    Bb (b13) SUS/G
    C9#9
    A7#11/D
    E7#9#11/G

  7. #206

    User Info Menu

    A7 - Bb7 - C7 - A7 - E7?

    Not a lot. Depends on the tune.

  8. #207

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    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...
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    No. It only begins when you stop knowing
    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    That may apply to mysticism but not to music :-)
    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
    I think I agree with ragman1, if I understood him correctly.
    Jazz musicians, as represented at this forum, my only connection with jazz, really, would to play whatever, without knowledge and at the same time they expect audience to be so educated to appreciate the result, understand how hard it is to be done, even to like the result and, even more so, pay for it. Then they wonder, what went wrong?
    Last edited by Vladan; 05-16-2020 at 09:59 AM.

  9. #208

    User Info Menu

    We need knowledge, if not skill, to do anything in life but the thing is the drive behind it.

    It's quite possible to forget oneself when playing and that may be the essence of creativity, then there's no motive to impress, etc etc. Where there's any self-centred motive then one's attention is divided. It's only when there's no division in attention that something new can happen.

    The trouble is one can't make those moments occur, that's the rub.

  10. #209

    User Info Menu

    As for artists imitating God, it implies that they know what God is - in which case they don't at all because God is the unknowable. Which means that God is their own creation, their own concept. Which means they're imitating themselves all the time :-)

    We always think we need a perfect vision to aspire to but that again is a complete division in attention. There's a vast gap between me and the perfection I desire and in that gap there's struggle, and we call that creative! As I said, it's only when there's no such gap at all that there's no division in energy, which means everything flows. In those moments of self-absence, which is the love of what one's doing, there's a creative state. There's no other creative state.
    Last edited by ragman1; 05-16-2020 at 01:05 PM.

  11. #210

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    We need knowledge, if not skill, to do anything in life but the thing is the drive behind it.

    It's quite possible to forget oneself when playing and that may be the essence of creativity, then there's no motive to impress, etc etc. Where there's any self-centred motive then one's attention is divided. It's only when there's no division in attention that something new can happen.

    The trouble is one can't make those moments occur, that's the rub.
    Which is all fine, with one important caution: musician can not really expect that any dose of attitude, or forgetting him self, will make rubbish he plays sound good to anybody (but himself).

  12. #211

    User Info Menu

    Have folks been posting their own music that's germane to the discussion? I'm gonna be cheeky and do it, only b/c this old tune really doesn't 'land' til the very end.

    This is a 1991 tune, Reverend Al (yeah, that Reverend Al---I was trying, I think, to capture his swagger and way of scoping things out to see what/who he can use to his advantage entering a room, with the beginning hits).

    Harmonically, it seems to move in alternating 2nds, minor thirds, one fourth (Bb-Eb7) and ends up a half-step up from the 'root' in the final measures. You'd have a hell of a time with Roman numerals on this one. (Looking back, it sounds a bit like Wayne's earlier pieces, especially bars 16-20---also a Freddie Hubbard tune, Prophet Jennings, also 'musical portaiture' and I probably 'liberated' its 15 bar form).

    Disclosure: the 2 out choruses were taken directly from pianists John DiMartino's solo on the long-ago demo. Just too good to resist...
    Attached Images Attached Images

  13. #212

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    Which is all fine, with one important caution: musician can not really expect that any dose of attitude, or forgetting him self, will make rubbish he plays sound good to anybody (but himself).
    I was going to say that. Loving what you do and forgetting yourself while you do it, doesn't mean it's any good. But, of course, to that person it won't matter. I think that's the difference.

  14. #213

    User Info Menu

    Gotta say: after spending the last 2 days with the score and a (fine) companion book of analysis and synopsis of Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra the jazz usage of non-tradition harmony and form looks a lot simpler---and that's not to denigrate it in any way. You need manageable forms to improvise over, or lose the flow or, worse, get plowed by the 'tyranny of the pen'.

    But I'm finding I'm getting very useful insights into breaking down jazz usage by studying classical, b/c they're always way out ahead in harmony and form (just as African-derived rhythm forms are way ahead). These sound like over-simplifications, I know. Of course there's always cross-referencing and 'borrowing' in advanced thinkers---as there should be.

    Let's face one thing, though: Jazz of the last 60 years has been greatly influenced in content by innovations in 20th Century classical music. We'd have to be deaf not to acknowledge that. So it makes sense to me to study those materials---again, breaking them down to understandable/teachable building blocks---to get insight into modern jazz harmony.

    Especially since jazz in this period has metamorphosed so much into a harmony-first music (a trend I don't always love).

    OK, slam away!

  15. #214

    User Info Menu

    Well it’s because I went through a massive 20th century classical obsession in my early 20s that I find most harmony centric jazz a bit pointless most of the time... why not just listen to the real deal?

    on the other hand, improvisation is good for more than one thing, but tbh a lot of music has been in a stylistic retreat towards simpler tonality since Derek Bailey brought Webern into jazz....

    But jazz is often reactive to innovations in classical harmony. This is as true now as it was with Bix in the 20s. Or Red Norvo for that matter:



    so anyway we get our harmony second hand, but structurally our music is much more repetitious... the way I see it is jazz is a music of layers. The tonality is layered like the rhythm. So we layer new harmonic sounds on standards and so on.

    That’s another reason why CST bugs the hell out of me; that way it’s normally taught doesn’t acknowledge the layeredness of jazz harmony, a layeredness which really isn’t quite like polytonality OR standard tonality, but something that is both independent and connected... a bit like how a polyrhythmic cycle goes in and out of phase but has a relationship to the basic grid. Like what Reg talks about with references, tonal targets or blue notes or whatever (I think!)

    its also one reason why it is (at least for me) quite hard to be creative with non functional tunes. What’s structural and what’s not? Where are the supporting walls, and what can I knock through?

  16. #215

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    its also one reason why it is (at least for me) quite hard to be creative with non functional tunes. What’s structural and what’s not? Where are the supporting walls, and what can I knock through?
    I had some great older players tell me that after a certain point, you have to hash it out and formulate and use your own personal codex, it's your duty to yourself and your contribution to the music.

  17. #216

    User Info Menu

    Christian: What's CST?

  18. #217

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by joelf
    Christian: What's CST?
    CST = chord scale theory. Basically the idea of determining what scale is appropriate over a particular chord in a tune. It’s discussed and referenced in many forum posts, so if it’s unfamiliar, the Search function is your friend.

  19. #218

    User Info Menu

    Joelf... It's not really a Theory...... It's a collection of common jazz practice... Chord and possible Scale relationships. With reference to... common jazz chord progressions.

    So it helps describes, possible Chord Functions to a "Key" as well as possible Relationships and Function to other chords. It helps organize and expand Vertical and Horizontal possible relationships.

    Which leads to Direct interrelationships between Chords and Scales which do not have independent Functions. Helps expand Function to Key relationships.... with use of Function to Tonal center relationships.

    Helps with use of Modal organization yada yada. It's simple really ... well at least to Schoenberg.

  20. #219

    User Info Menu

    Thanks. Really.

    I really try to think in melody and voice-leading. One note or chord to the next, with the 'big picture' (long line) always in view. To me it doesn't matter if a thing falls into Roman numeral analysis or other systems. I try to let intuition lead and analyze later, but I can be quite analytical when pressed.

    I have a student, a real gem. He's a multi-reed player and I think he'll be known as a composer one day. (Some of you may know composition/songwriting is my passion. I work hardest at that). So today, we went over what I discern to be his strongest piece, with the goal of him understanding and building on his own vocabulary---which is original and logical. Because I'm studying Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra (with plenty of cheat sheets, trust me) I now have learned fancy-pants terms like 'pitch sets' (c'mon: everybody say...!). But he really did have a 7-note group that he transposed, altered, and put chords to. I assigned him: make a simple graph of what happens with that pitch set. Only the piano RH. Then find a system for the harmonization. Yeah, I'm old-school---harmony ought to be attractive and supportive, not dominating. Shoot me.

    I guarantee, after this, he be able will build on the seeds of a compositional style that began intuitively, and go in any direction he chooses. Now it's bolstered by understanding.

    'Intuition should lead knowledge, but if it's out there on it's own you'll flounder at some point'---Bill Evans

    People think of and categorize things in different ways---the way it should be. For me, whatever kind of harmony is used it's getting from note to note in lines and melodies, then understanding it in a basic, build-able way...

  21. #220

    User Info Menu

    Hey Joelf,

    Sounds great... yea Bartok, Note to note, inversional symmetry. I spent a year with his string Qts... The serious contemporary art of composing non-commercial music... I remember. But I loved jazz also.... anyway I always try and use the organizational methods of the type of music I'm working with at least have a understanding of, before I start imposing my personal choices. Bartok, from the Liszt pn school.... could get into Christians praxis aesthetics relationships... always enjoy your posts... thanks

  22. #221

    User Info Menu


  23. #222

    User Info Menu

    Ahh Lendvai, read his Bartok book about 20 years ago. I always felt his ideas were somewhere on the penumbra between interesting useful and total trapezoids.

    Not Bartok’s system btw... it’s controversial whether Lendvais ideas represent some unconscious process Bartok was using or ... well, a bunch of trapezoids.

    But he did use the octatonic scale (as the classicals like to call it) so ... maybe?

    certainly when this cycle is applied to dom7 chords it relates to some pretty familiar stuff within jazz - I remember reharmonising a 12 bar blues this way so each chord root formed a tone in a 12 tone note row.

    i suppose I thought I was being terribly clever. The melodic lines over the changes were also tone rows.

    it sounded like crap.

    Anyway, the turnaround of Isotope by Joe Henderson is understandable from this standpoint for example.

    Obviosuly some well known jazz progressions that sub for 2 5 1s can be found within the axis... but it does miss some of the lovely subs that are not based on this logic...

    Barry would call it ‘brothers and sisters’

    In terms of an all encompassing music theory, no... it’s too simple. But I do think it’s quite interesting for certain applications and I often have this idea in the back of my head. Can stimulate interesting ideas in conjunction with the lugholes.

  24. #223

    User Info Menu

    Has anyone here tried interpreting Wayne’s changes through this framework? How would you go about it with the more complex chords Wayne uses? Did you find it useful?

  25. #224

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Ahh Lendvai, read his Bartok book about 20 years ago. I always felt his ideas were somewhere on the penumbra between interesting useful and total trapezoids.

    Not Bartok’s system btw... it’s controversial whether Lendvais ideas represent some unconscious process Bartok was using or ... well, a bunch of trapezoids.

    But he did use the octatonic scale (as the classicals like to call it) so ... maybe?

    certainly when this cycle is applied to dom7 chords it relates to some pretty familiar stuff within jazz - I remember reharmonising a 12 bar blues this way so each chord root formed a tone in a 12 tone note row.

    i suppose I thought I was being terribly clever. The melodic lines over the changes were also tone rows.

    it sounded like crap.

    Anyway, the turnaround of Isotope by Joe Henderson is understandable from this standpoint for example.

    Obviosuly some well known jazz progressions that sub for 2 5 1s can be found within the axis... but it does miss some of the lovely subs that are not based on this logic...

    Barry would call it ‘brothers and sisters’

    In terms of an all encompassing music theory, no... it’s too simple. But I do think it’s quite interesting for certain applications and I often have this idea in the back of my head. Can stimulate interesting ideas in conjunction with the lugholes.
    Dueling theorist! What fun!

    There's a Leibowitz, too, (mentioned in David Cooper's excellent book on the Concerto for Orchestra). Dude practically wanted to boil Bartok in oil (or at least not invite him to Schoenberg's birthday party---only 12 seats) b/c Bartok had the gall to 'retreat' from the atonality of his 4th String Quartet to the 'safety' of the more tonal Concerto.

    This will raise some hackles, and mod: delete it if you must, but

    Some people seriously need to get laid...

  26. #225

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by joelf
    Dueling theorist! What fun!

    There's a Leibowitz, too, (mentioned in David Cooper's excellent book on the Concerto for Orchestra). Dude practically wanted to boil Bartok in oil (or at least not invite him to Schoenberg's birthday party---only 12 seats) b/c Bartok had the gall to 'retreat' from the atonality of his 4th String Quartet to the 'safety' of the more tonal Concerto.

    This will raise some hackles, and mod: delete it if you must, but

    Some people seriously need to get laid...
    Haha, too true.

    Schoenberg himself was regarded as a bit old fashioned by the time the hardcore modernists (Boulez et al) turned up.. He was still writing Sonatas FFS.

    i honestly don’t think the early modernists - Schoenberg, Bartok of course Stravinsky were anything like as dogmatic as the hangers on and followers.... mind you Boulez has his moments. Holy shit:


  27. #226

    User Info Menu

    Tom Harrell, in his very prolific catalog, has the knack of using unusual (read: unexpected, and they work) or non-resolutions in his pieces. Like in these 2:





  28. #227

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Haha, too true.

    Schoenberg himself was regarded as a bit old fashioned by the time the hardcore modernists (Boulez et al) turned up.. He was still writing Sonatas FFS.

    i honestly don’t think the early modernists - Schoenberg, Bartok of course Stravinsky were anything like as dogmatic as the hangers on and followers.... mind you Boulez has his moments. Holy shit:

    'Newness' always attracts cults. Followers range from the brilliant to the sycophantic. It can be as much a cul de sac as going retro.

    Artists truly secure in their voices and visions aren't afraid to cull from the best materials of any kind. You can make interesting paintings with more paint available. And the beauty is you don't have to use them all in any one painting...

  29. #228

    User Info Menu

    Please allow me to digress---and reminisce:

    In the late '80s, my 2 main instructors at City College (of The Mango) were the late Ed Summerlin and Ron Carter. I was uncomfortable as hell around and feared both---until I grew up some years later, and realized they were on my side, and tough b/c they felt they had to be. I learned a lot from both, Ron especially.

    Ed was a stone advocate of 'progressive' writing, and very opinionated*. I did my first big band charts under his tutelage, also Dick Lieb's, and they were conducted by the late Bob Norden. Ed would tell us to compose by 'making up an artificial scale'. I scoffed then (see above, re growing up), thinking 'if I don't hear a thing...'. Now I'm ready for it, b/c I think I may be at a dead end of what I can do with the harmony I know---or, rather, would like to expand the palette. And Ed was an interesting writer, one of the 1st jazz composers to write a liturgy for the Methodist Church, and a contributor to an early Freddie Hubbard recording (Hub Cap?).

    I have a friend, Glenn Mills, a wonderful composer. He knows much more than I do about form and orchestration, so I still study with him. (James Chirillo is also a terrific writer/orchestrater---and one of my oldest friends). Glenn wrote this terrific piece for the BMI composers' workshop: Broad Daylight. It uses 2 cells: FG Bb Eb; A Bb G# A. If I get his permission, I'll post the recording and score.

    * If you think we're bad, talkin' schnizzle about each other, hang out with writers sometime. Speaking of Ed, I later went to study with John Carisi (who imeediately fell into a coma---draw your own conclusions...); earlier Manny Albam and my true mentor of all these, the great Bill Finegan (Chirillo was also a student of Bill's). So I brought up Ed to Carisi. He made a disgusted face. His exact words: 'He's a fraud, a politician. (the last thing thorny, outspoken Ed was was a 'politician'!). They asked me for an opinion when he was up for the CCNY job (head of the Jazz Program), and I copped out...'. I kept my mouth shut. And Bill (whom I adore) on Manny (to me one of the great writers---it all sang and swung): 'I could talk about Manny for hours. (Pregnant pause) Dispassionately'.

    But I digress from my digression. And now it's time to get back to the piano and my own writing...

  30. #229

    User Info Menu

    I'd love to hear the Mills piece.

    Apparently Reiner Baas is all synthetic scales as well... He certainly has a sound.

    TBH the thing that I find most interesting about composers is the way they deal with form and texture... Anna Meredith in particular I've been listening to, and she uses some familiar rock and pop resources, but the way she puts them together is quite unlike something a jazz or rock musician would think of doing, I think. The harmony side of it seems to retreated in importance, and a lot of it is based around simple pop-style chords, with some subversions.

    For instance this one has a very 'indie' texture - you can hear borrowings from Nirvana even:



    A composer being someone who organises material, rather than coming up with it necessarily, or writing in a 'style' - that's pretty meta. Meredith obviously likes rock guitars, EDM style beats and swirly post minimalist textures, but her sense of form takes her out of the sub-Reich rut.

    Musical narrative is important to me, I think

  31. #230

    User Info Menu

    My completed rendition of Iris. Thanks for the recommendation rpjazzguitar.

    I found this very difficult. I chose to record it on acoustic archtop because I though that would be a more interesting way to do it, but the floating nature of the chords highlights every imperfection.


  32. #231

    User Info Menu

    Correction, I heard sus b9 and assumed it was Db, but upon closer listening, I realized it's an Ab7sus b9 over Db bass (V of Db pedal point)

    : Hancock plays for the so called "Db- b6" :
    A Db Eb Ab over Db
    Last edited by rintincop; 05-22-2020 at 08:06 PM.

  33. #232

    User Info Menu

    Why not phrygian dominant?

  34. #233

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    Hancock plays that so called "Db- b6" as a Db7sus b9 (2nd mode of B melodic minor). It's like Right hand plays Ab Db D Gb over Db bass note (basically changing the flavor of the previous Db7 +4). Levine covers that voicing in his odd Chpt 3 on "Sus and Phrygian" voicings
    That doesn't sound quite right to me. Listening to the first time Hancock plays that chord in 'Iris' (about 34 secs), it sounds more like Ab, A natural, Db (all over a Db bass). You could play something very similar to it on the guitar as: x 4 6 2 2 x. Can't hear a D in it, that would sound quite unpleasant and would clash with the melody.

    It's a typical Hancock sound, like a sort of Gb min (with a second i.e. Ab) over a Db bass. Similar to the bit near the end of Dolphin Dance where he plays Am7 over E bass (right after a Bm7 over E, it's a very similar sounding move).

    Another way to look at it is Amaj7 over Db (apparently Shorter's original lead sheet showed this chord as Amaj9).

  35. #234

    User Info Menu

    Ooops, I listened again more closely, Hancock plays

    RH spelled from the bottom up: A Db Eb Ab over Db bass. It's almost Db- b6 but there is no Fb, so it doesn't sound like Db- b6.
    It sounds like V of Db7#11 (Ab7sus b9/Db)
    Last edited by rintincop; 05-22-2020 at 07:52 PM.

  36. #235

    User Info Menu

    So, it's like Ab7sus b9 (2nd mode of Gb melodic minor) over a Db pedal point in the bass (so we get V7sus b9 of Db7#11 which = Ab-Maj7/Db)

    Parallel melodic minor modes, a whole step apart, all over Db pedal point, one of Herbie's favorite parallel pairs of melodic minor scales.

    ||: Db7#11 ( Ab melodic minor/Db) | Gb melodic minor /Db :|| makes for a typical Herbie style vamp on the intro and outro episodes on various tunes.

    Herbie will sometimes take it further with the parallel descending melodic minor tonalities over a pedal point.

    Here's an example of Herbie shifting down thru melodic minor keys over a static pedal point:

    Ab-Maj7/Db | Gb-Maj7/Db | E-Maj7/Db | D-Maj7/Db | B-Maj7/Db | Db7sus |

    Iris can all be derived from modes of major and modes of melodic minor. Just like Mark Levine would state and what he's good at analyzing.
    Last edited by rintincop; 05-22-2020 at 08:45 PM.

  37. #236

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    Ooops, I listened again more closely, Hancock plays

    RH spelled from the bottom up: A Db Eb Ab over Db bass. It's almost Db- b6 but there is no Fb, so it doesn't sound like Db- b6.
    It sounds like V of Db7#11 (Ab7sus b9/Db)
    i has trouble hearing that chord tbh. I ended up going with the chart because it sounded close. Its good to get another pair of ears on it, the best way to learn by listening. Hancock isn’t someone I’ve transcribed a lot of...

  38. #237

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    So, it's like Ab7sus b9 (2nd mode of Gb melodic minor) over a Db pedal point in the bass (so we get V7sus b9 of Db7#11 which = Ab-Maj7/Db)

    Parallel melodic minor modes, a whole step apart, all over Db pedal point, one of Herbie's favorite parallel pairs of melodic minor scales.

    ||: Db7#11 ( Ab melodic minor/Db) | Gb melodic minor /Db :|| makes for a typical Herbie style vamp on the intro and outro episodes on various tunes.

    Herbie will sometimes take it further with the parallel descending melodic minor tonalities over a pedal point.

    Here's an example of Herbie shifting down thru melodic minor keys over a static pedal point:

    Ab-Maj7/Db | Gb-Maj7/Db | E-Maj7/Db | D-Maj7/Db | B-Maj7/Db | Db7sus |

    Iris can all be derived from modes of major and modes of melodic minor. Just like Mark Levine would state and what he's good at analyzing.
    I wonder if that not just the way we hear it.

    Melodic minor modes are kind of obvious stuff, the magic is in getting things more specific.

    And often modes distort the sounds a little. Put a b5 here, add in a b7 there, but it might not be the sound. You might just hear it that way because it’s the framework you know.

    If you want to put a 6 on a 7sus4b9 do it. Maybe a b6? Maybe nothing?

    And the melody with the bass seems to be the backbone of the composition. I’d like to see Wayne’s chart to know how much Herbie was interpreting with his own musical language. I reckon McCoy would have played it a little different for instance. And i think most jazz manuals take Herbie’s approach as standard.

    In my version I chose to go more with diminished scale type voicings over the Bb7b9 into Db7#11. It’s not what Herbie plays there but it seemed that way the melody was constructed. McCoy might have used diminished there perhaps. Or Peter Bernstein perhaps.

  39. #238

    User Info Menu

    Herbie and Wayne worked closely together harmonically. Herbie loves the sound of melodic minor harmony and so does Wayne. Herbie uses characteristic melodic minor voicings, again and again, that pop up all over his work and Wayne's work. He's not thinking so much about specific chord tones, he's thinking pools of notes (melodic minors, major scale, diminished scale and whole tone, and of course some blues) for harmonic "episodes" as he calls them. I'm pretty sure he influenced Wayne to a great degree being the chord player and Wayne being the melody man.

  40. #239

    User Info Menu

    Wayne’s original changes were:

    / Fm9 / Emaj7 Gbmaj7 / Emaj7 Db7 / Cmaj9
    / Cmaj9 / Cmin9 / Dbmaj7 Cmin9 / Db7b5 Amaj9
    / G+9 C9b5 / /

    according to the book I mentioned before, this is from the deposited lead sheet at Library of Congress. (The tune started out as a 10-bar theme in 4:4).

  41. #240

    User Info Menu

    Re "Db- b6" hard to hear Herbie played AMaj/C#


    Dbm b6 really a pianistic chord. there is a difference in min b6 and min#5 sometimes (rarely) the min#5 is indicated with b7)


    Dbminb6 has 5th Ab enharmonics blur a bit Ab/G# Maj7 for A


    In essence AMaj7 the AMaj9 is just decoration.

  42. #241

    User Info Menu

    Certaiinly I think of that chord as an inversion.

    I think there are inversion people and people who think of every chord as built as a mode from the bass, so there are no inversions.

    So Barry Harris might say - play the scale from the 3rd of G7

    But Adam Rogers would say - the B locrian mode

    (Would Mark Levine say - C ionian scale from the 7th rintin, or use Locrian?)

    It's just a different way of describing the exact same thing and that makes learning the ropes seem much more complicated then it actually is until you realise this.

    I think jazz teaching has moved towards the latter 'there are no inversions, everything's a mode' framing...

  43. #242

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop View Post
    Wayne’s original changes were:

    / Fm9 / Emaj7 Gbmaj7 / Emaj7 Db7 / Cmaj9
    / Cmaj9 / Cmin9 / Dbmaj7 Cmin9 / Db7b5 Amaj9
    / G+9 C9b5 / /

    according to the book I mentioned before, this is from the deposited lead sheet at Library of Congress. (The tune started out as a 10-bar theme in 4:4).
    Wow...

    C maj 9! That got rewritten to C/Ab or Abmaj7#5...

    Also, no Bb7b9 chord instead we have Emaj7... Maybe because the same motif (#4-2-3-#4) was used on Db7, makes the construction of the tune a little less transparent. Also - minor third relation.

    The melody tells us this where the chords disguise it...

    But also - disguised tonality - Db7 to C rather obvious....

    Melody suggests Db7#11 not Db7b5... shows how non standard chord symbols were back then.

  44. #243

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop View Post
    Herbie and Wayne worked closely together harmonically. Herbie loves the sound of melodic minor harmony and so does Wayne. Herbie uses characteristic melodic minor voicings, again and again, that pop up all over his work and Wayne's work. He's not thinking so much about specific chord tones, he's thinking pools of notes (melodic minors, major scale, diminished scale and whole tone, and of course some blues) for harmonic "episodes" as he calls them. I'm pretty sure he influenced Wayne to a great degree being the chord player and Wayne being the melody man.
    I'm hearing it from Herbie, I don't hear it so much from Wayne. Wayne isn't expressing harmony in the same way on a lot of his solos. He plays a lot fewer notes for one. And Wayne is like Mr Pentatonic as well.,. I haven't studied Wayne on this song (no time) but it seems form solos on other tunes that he's not well behaved in the way Herbie is.

    I find that interesting. The Herbie approach is more familiar to me. I hear it imitated a lot... it's like Seinfeld. Pianists playing lots of notes... OK. I hear lots of guitar players who are very accomplished in that approach as well.

    One thing that strikes me as effective about those Miles and Wayne recordings is that not everyone has the same approach. Diversity is good. Herbie is valued because he has his own voice and approach. Somehow that's become the voice and the approach. I have a problem with anyone telling me there's one right way to do things.

    Jazz education has kind of selected a canon of players that fit into their theory - Herbie is one, for instance. Pitch choices. Easy to evaluate. Miles, less so. With down his notes and you'd fail theory 101.

    Also from an ears/theory basis I think characteristic melodic minor voicings are often not as characteristic as they are cracked up to be. That's why I like Jordan/Stephon Harris's approach. It's a lot more specific. Look at the melodic triad, not a whole scale. It's great for this type of thing... You get all the sounds, but they are much more controlled and refined.

    For instance - b5 in the Bb7#9b13 chord?

    The closest thing to characteristic melodic minor voicing for me might be a major triad with an add b6 used in various US positions - tone below a m7b5, tone above a dom 7th, and so on... It's good because it avoids internal tritones which is tough with the melodic minor scale. But that's not even melodic minor, not really ...

    Why 7 notes? Why not 8? Or 6? Or 9?

    Is one dorian voicing fungible for another? (Of course not.)

  45. #244

    User Info Menu

    I'm not a huge fan of Wayne's playing TBH. Or, I should amend that to not always. His writing, hell yeah. I found it kind of meandering in that Plugged Nickel period. Just sort of discursive, and never taking you home. And I found his soprano sound personal, but kind of bleating. Dug the earlier and contemporaneous Blue Notes very much, and whenever else he played---not more 'in', but with a certain artistic self-editing.

    I know he's a great player and probable genius, and it was really astonishing to hear him play over his challenging tunes on High Life and Atlantis----just like walking in the park. And I saw and heard him do it live with a string orchestra, and it kind of blew my mind. And someone played me a recording of Just in Time that was great in every way.

    What I mean: I dig very much the looseness of it---he and the late C. Sharpe are the two most flowing players I've heard, maybe. But as a total improviser, I prefer a little more focus, and a smooth wrap-up.

    Through it all I remain a fan and admirer, who would like to figure out his strategies...

  46. #245

    User Info Menu

    Dunno a light bulb went on in many head when I heard his 60s stuff after not listening to that stuff for AGES (just his more recent stuff.) he’s not - that thing I thought he was at that point. He’s always been that puckish musical spirit...

    Post Trane virtuoso sax player? Well Yes and No... he’s just odd, droll. Is he serious? Plays like he talks. so then I heard that he’s always been that player...

    Harmonically, yeah not really what I though he was. Paraphrases the melody a LOT. In a weird way it sounds to me like the harmony is coincidental. He’s not playing the changes in the way that you might if you had the changes and played on each chord. He’s sitting at the centre of it?

    Hard to explain. And then Herbie comes along and plays the chords. Is OK. It’s his job.

  47. #246

    User Info Menu

    ...And after all that I went on a listening jag. Re-copped Night Dreamer off the recording and jammed along. That's one of his (superficially) easiest and most rooted in blues pieces.

    Yeah, gotta play that one more. Wayne, moi, my acoustic---and thou(s)...

  48. #247

    User Info Menu

    Pres didn't 'play the changes' either. Wore it like a badge---and I hear didn't do too bad with it...

  49. #248

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop View Post
    Herbie and Wayne worked closely together harmonically. Herbie loves the sound of melodic minor harmony and so does Wayne. Herbie uses characteristic melodic minor voicings, again and again, that pop up all over his work and Wayne's work. He's not thinking so much about specific chord tones, he's thinking pools of notes (melodic minors, major scale, diminished scale and whole tone, and of course some blues) for harmonic "episodes" as he calls them. I'm pretty sure he influenced Wayne to a great degree being the chord player and Wayne being the melody man.
    There was a series of Herbie's masterclass lecture in Japanese jazz magazine, and on Nefertiti he said all the changes he'd seen were wrong and showed the one Wayne wrote and specified the voicing of each chord. So, I don't believe it was Herbie's influence, rather the opposite.

  50. #249

    User Info Menu

    Wayne says his pieces are always evolving and changing. The recordings show this over the years. His tunes are not set in stone.

  51. #250

    User Info Menu

    Pianists refer to the characteristic melodic minor voicing as b3 5 7 9, (or it’s common inversion 7, 9, b3, 5 ) a rootless voicing. It is applicable and interchangeable to all 7 modes of the parent melodic minor scale. Hancock moves that particular melodic minor voicing almost as freely in and out as McCoy Tyner moves his 4th voicing in and out of key on Passion Dance.