-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
05-12-2020 10:55 AM
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
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,
-
I don’t really like Debussy
besides Wayne’s favourite composer is Vaughan Williams
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
I also do not liek Leonard Bernstein (he is not even genius).
-
Originally Posted by grahambop
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.
.
-
Originally Posted by marvinvv
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.
-
Originally Posted by jonah
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
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.
-
Originally Posted by marvinvv
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
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
-
Originally Posted by marvinvv
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.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
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.
-
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.
-
Originally Posted by Reg
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.
-
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.
-
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...
-
"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.
-
Originally Posted by rintincop
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.
-
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.)
-
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.)
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
-
"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
-
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:
-
Jazz - in fact, any type of music - only works when you know exactly what you're doing and why.
-
That may apply to mysticism but not to music :-)
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
Gibson Thin line Guitar Models
Yesterday, 11:07 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos