-
I can't tell you how to do it but I can tell you how I did it. There's a Stan Getz transcription in Bb. Comparing it with other versions it's a lot easier so I took that.
I don't know the tune, I've never heard it before - I don't even know how it goes - but the idea was to bring out the sound of the chords. Mostly it's predominately a b9 sound rather than anything greatly altered, so I stuck to that.
I wasn't worried about the technical side of the chord analysis and all that, it's too distracting, frankly. I'm just watching the flow of the sounds. For instance, I hear the first few bars as a sort of Dm (BbM7) sound to Cm (D7b9) to Gm to Bbm (ii of Eb7), and so on.
So it's mostly the b9 sound plus a tinge of blues. I put in some whole-tone effects over the last F7 because it sounded right. That's about it.
First ever time of doing it so it's probably hesitant. Just done in my usual boring style - Doug Raney it's not. I'm sure you could do better. I think your 'jazz vocab' is probably more authentic.
-
06-20-2020 11:07 PM
-
That's really quite lovely and I enjoyed it. Thanks for giving it a shot! I'm actually enjoying the melody itself. More and more, I'm finding the basic tune a wonderful platform for elaboration. Right now, if I were playing it in a jam session (not likely) my "solo" would mainly be a vast elaboration on the melody. that's not my usual approach (which sucks anyway) but on this one, the melody notes are extremely inviting targets.
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
The first 4 bars are still all in Eb major. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
You can play Eb major for the first 2 bars: |Eb^ Eb/D|Cm7 Cm7/Bb|
Then like Alan said for bar 3 you can treat that as Am7b5 Ab7 or Am7b5 D7 which brings you nicely to Gm7, then it's a 3 6 2 5.
If you look at all the notes of the melody they stay diatonic to Eb major. There's no need to worry or get overwhelmed. Once you understand and hear the harmony it'll be much clearer to you.
-
Yes. I'm playing around with MM 1-2 straight up Eb, then M3 a bit of tension, basically a plagal type cadence. I'm currently working with variations on Abm6/fm7b5 as a chromatic step to the Gm7 in m. 7. Then I'll try playing off of the F9/Am7b5/Cm6 shape. I'm enjoying both elaborating on the melody--which currently looks like a super-over-dressed mobster set to music (my experimenting is going a bit far)--and also improvising. Originally Posted by don_oz
Side note: I'm learning a lot by focusing on a single tune. Looking back, the tunes I am most comfortable improvising over are (GASP!!) the ones I know the best for the chords, subs, melody in different octaves, chord-melody, etc. I think this tune captured my imagination because it's not just your standard AABA tune.
-
Well said Ozzy. Don't let the chord police worry you.
-
I wonder if the principles differ for learning improvisation vs. experienced players? Tell an experience player not to be intimidated by the "chord police" and you get some pretty exciting stuff. Tell that to a middling player, you might get a train wreck. Maybe the train wrecks are vital to learning? I can't say on that. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Speaking of duets with bass...
-
Yea Lawson... part of playing tunes is making or having an analysis of the tune. There are always lots of choices as to how you want to make that analysis. Generally.... you'll end up with your choice of how you want the music to work, (function) within the Form.
The simple analysis is two 8 bar sections. Simple Tonic Dom relationships then to the IV chord.... the subdominant
with some play with Relative Min. and back to the top.
You can play with melody.... by that I mean use melody as reference for creating relationships with...
ex. the G of 1st bar, the F of 3rd bar and Ab of 5th and Bb of 7th
then F of 9th bar and just keep following the melodic pattern....
The fun part would be how you connect and develop those relationships between the Melodic target notes.
Personally I usually just play Tonic Dominant Blues influenced melodic improve for 1st 4 bars... then slow the harmonic rhythm down for bars 5-8 to set up going to the IV chord bar 9 and the minor version of the Relative VI tonic and last 4 bars are just turnaround.
I always think and hear the melody, the changes and rhythmic etc... all the time. depending on gig or players or my mood if playing solo.... how much I stretch the tune.... have fun. Granted I'm a pro...and have my technique together... but that's the same way I approached playing 40 years ago....
If you want a somewhat detailed.... bar by bar etc... analysis... just let me know.
setup melodic lines for bars 4-8.... yea then
-
Interesting suggestions there. Don't know why this tune has grabbed me, but I'm leveraging the obsession to learn. I think most of the tune is pretty clear, I have generally just been a little stymied by the first lines. That move to C Major threw me at first, too, but I hit on moving from the AbMaj7 (thought of as a Cm7 shape) up to Dm7 then up to Em7 (subbing for CMaj7) it's the same "shape" moving up in whole steps. Don't know what to call that motion, but it's fun to play with.
-
So your talking changes.... just for thought What I would play, both comping and soloing. The extensions and alterations are Blue note references.
/ Eb69 D-7b5 G7alt / C-7 Bb13 / A-7b9b5 Ab13#11/ G-7 Gb9#11 G7alt/
/ F-7 C7b13 / Bb13sus Bb7b13 / Eb69 Bb13sus / Bb-7 E9 Eb9 A13 /
Ab6#11 G13 / D-7b5 G13b9 / C69 Eb13 / D-9 G7#9b13/
C-7 etc....
And soloing I would also be using these changes to reshape the melody and expand etc...
I could go another different direction harmonically.... which would end up with different changes etc...
-
I don’t know what the answer is Lawson. Everyone’s different. If one suggestion is useful to you, great. There’s no linear progression A to B that works for everyone.
learning to make up melodies in a key is the way older players learned. Bop players transplanted ii v lines by and large. More recent players think in chord scales. What I wish I’d learned early on is to sweat the theory less and absorb more music. That’s best done by ear.
i look at Reg’s posts and my eyes bleed but actually it’s all a lot more simple and logical than it looks. Notation in jazz gets stupid very quickly...
-
For example, A-7b5b9 - never seen it written down in a chord symbol but I play that all the time...
it’s just 5 x 5 5 4 6 - a Cm7 chord atop an A bass
-
Three definitive versions to listen to imo. I guarantee that none of them where thinking of the stuff in Reg's post.
-
It can be helpful to refer to the late Ralph Patt's Vanilla Book for tunes like this. His site is a great resource.
Ralph Patt's Jazz Web Page
-
Another guitar version, by Rene Thomas:
-
OK... obviously I can walk and chew gum at the same time. I just look at a tune and make conscious choices as to what my playing.... comping or soloing implies. And a tune like Someone In Love... is just really simple... And Lawson was talking with changes.... so I said also talking with changes... with a Blue Note Reference.... and spelled out some simple chord patterns which would help make the feel... the groove of the tune have a faster Harmonic Rhythm. And help support Blue Notes as part of the improv. Instead of the very simple chords with slow Harmonic rhythm.
Typically when playing tunes.... it's not a bad idea to... not just play the same thing over and over.... at the same tempo feel. The changes I notated out are very vanilla... the only chord that even hints at anything harmonically new is the G13b9 which is just Modal Interchange to Harmonic Maj. and that's been around for 30 years.
All the Chord Patterns are very typical. I mean the Min7b5 with a b9 is just a way of playing a II V to the G-7 C7 or (II V) of II- V7 of I. It helps support blue notes.
I mean at a gig most would just hear what a soloist is playing and cover. I would, it's easy to hear what's being implied by most soloist on standards.
Not every one likes playing vanilla chord tones improv.... after a 100 x's it get old.
And yea cool vid examples... I just don't like playing like that anymore.... they sound like senior center gigs. It's boring.... And the Ralph Patt's Vanilla book.... really Jonathan. That's almost the Schenker Layered analysis of standards.
Hey You want to get better at playing standards... play it 4 or 5 times in a row.... but with different styles, feels and time sigs. When I use to do college festival workshops...and ensembles. It was always fun have groups just play the same tune a few times in a row with different styles. Which usually requires changing melodies, and changes...
Hey Lawson... sorry was just trying to help. Maybe move on to new tune then come back. I did like the Diana Krall version with with Christian and Russel.
-
Sorry? I don't know what you're sorry for. You've given me several detailed sets of observations and ideas that it'll take me a while to work through and think about. That's very helpful and I'm grateful for your advice. I assimilate musical ideas slowly. IN my day-job life, basically I'm an intellectual dealing with words and texts all the time. In music, I tend to try and let other forces and inclinations play out, but at the same time I don't plan on re-inventing the musical wheel, I know there's good advice out there for how to reduce the infinite numbers of possible choices down to a few that I can use. You've given me a bunch, and thank you for that!
I have a feeling my playing isn't going to make any of you guys want to tell the world, "Hey I helped that guy out!" but you have definitely given me a lot of hope and encouragement about my playing.
Thanks! I'll keep plugging with this until I get tired of the tune, which I'm not.. yet.
-
I'm wondering why the vanilla book has it in C while mostly everyone else does it in Eb. Ralph tends to get his keys right (as far as I know).
-
Based on a couple of charts I found, I think the original sheet music was in concert C. Dinah Shore and Bing Crosby recorded it 1944. I’m sure they would have been different keys. Horn players find it easier to play in flat keys. They gravitated to Eb, probably due to a particularly inspired recording.
Last edited by KirkP; 06-24-2020 at 03:45 AM.
-
yuck Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Several fakebooks have it in C, and some of the recordings. Herb Ellis did it in C. Originally Posted by ragman1
Last edited by lawson-stone; 06-24-2020 at 08:50 AM.
-
Yeah, it is pretty dissonant. Usually I use it like this Originally Posted by djg
yuck
5 x 5 5 4 6
x 5 4 5 4 6
x 5 4 5 4 5
x x 2 3 3 2
Or whatever...
-
It's just an altered II- V . Your approaching the III- chord.... It's just another choice. When you go through the process of learning how to voice notes on top of chords. There are lots of options. The other detail is how long your sitting on something. And the lead line or melody on top is what's being heard....
A-7b5......................A-7b6..............D7#9b13.......Ab13
5 X 5 5 4 X becomes 5 X 5 5 6 X .... X 5 4 5 6 6... 4 X 4 5 6 X
G-7................G-9....................................Gb13 and C7alt.
3 X 3 3 3 X.... X X 3 3 3 5 ..X X 8 7 6 8 ... X X 8 9 9 11 ... X X 8 9 9 8 ...8 X 8 9 9 X
F-
X 8 6 8 9 X... 8 X etc...
When you get your technique together you have lots of options of how and what Chord Patterns you want to voice below your lead lines....or melody. Part of the skill is how much to bring out of the voicing notes.
You look at Ebma7.... how many ways can you imply that Ebma7. Generally you start with the basic chord and inversions. That's like the Mother Goose approach. Then you actually begin creating melodies or Lead Lines that also imply the chord and your lead line. Then you eventually start using Chord Patterns which still just imply that Ebma7.... Now you have Macro and Micro or Tune within the tune going on.
The point is.... your just playing what you hear, but because you can hear more and you have your technique together.... you have many more options as to what you hear. It doesn't just happen...
I'm from the school where you don't just pick these techniques from playing by ear and transcribing, learning tunes.
You need ways to organize what playing, so you can repeat it... and understand how to expand and apply the approaches in different contexts. Could be as simple as.... Maj. and Min. versions of same Chord Pattern. (Some call this BS theory)Which gets me back to the (II V) of III- and the ugly voicing. Most would never even hear 1/2 the harmonic BS good jazz players play... because they can't get past....hearing in isolation.... slow motion.
-
Play it as a slow ballad to find your bearings. The 1st four aren't dense, it's just notated in shorthand, in not such shorthand it's this:
|| Ebmaj7 / Ebmaj7/D / Cm7 / Cm7/Bb / | F7/A / Bb/Ab / | Gm7 / C7 / ||
Which without the bass:
|| Ebmaj7 / / / | Cm7 / / / | F7 / Bb7 / | Gm7 / C7 ||
-
yeah, i fooled around with it. i hear it as A7alt (b9b10#11). Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Yeah it sounded like an A7alt to me as well actually, which makes sense actually - Cm pent on A7alt is a common thing.
Again - hip thirdless voicings... leading tones are for Oktoberfest (sorry for stereotyping your nation ;-))
-
i like beer. and many tones can be leading tones. the G wants to go to F#, the Bb wants to go to A. you cant escape science. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
P.S.
I like that. Am7b5b9.5 x 5 5 4 6
Play A Locrian, A alt, G harm min, or even an A H-W dim over it.
-
all the tones can be leading tones except the leading tone because that’s lame. Originally Posted by djg
-
we live on different planets Originally Posted by christianm77
-
The third of the dominant is bourgeois
-
everyone feel Ok now. The world may be, well at least here in the states, dystopian, but we're cool here on JGF
-
:-) Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Here’s a chord chart from a book that I often prefer to other fake books. Often this book is closer to the original than the Real Book that has a bunch of subs that were used in a later recording. This one works for me seems easier to improvise over than the Real Book. The only thing that puzzles me is the F13 F#dim7 in the B’ section. It works, but I’m not sure why.
-
Oh, that looks like fun!
It works because the melody at that point is a natural A, the whole bar. The usual chord is just an F#o but I suspect they've added the F13 to give it some movement.F13/F#o
The chord before it is CM7 and it's in some ways a better transition to go from CM7 to F7 to F#o than just leap straight to the dim.
(I want to try that Am7/D7 variation...)
-
What book is this? That's a very interesting way to depict changes. Originally Posted by KirkP
Here’s a chord chart from a book that I often prefer to other fake books. Often this book is closer to the original than the Real Book that has a bunch of subs that were used in a later recording. This one works for me seems easier to improvise over than the Real Book. The only thing that puzzles me is the F13 F#dim7 in the B’ section. It works, but I’m not sure why.
-
That’s a ‘grille’; a type of chord chart used in Gypsy Jazz
-
Its a minor ii - v - i Originally Posted by KirkP
Here’s a chord chart from a book that I often prefer to other fake books. Often this book is closer to the original than the Real Book that has a bunch of subs that were used in a later recording. This one works for me seems easier to improvise over than the Real Book. The only thing that puzzles me is the F13 F#dim7 in the B’ section. It works, but I’m not sure why.
F13 —> Am7b5
F#o7 —> D7b9
Gm7
-
get yours here: Originally Posted by christianm77
http://www.jazzbanjo.nl/files/Anthol...es-de-Jazz.pdf
-
In C here, I show the chords with all the extensions just to be clear.
the second chord sounds so lush and also the F7#11.
it alters the I chord even though the melody stays in the realm of C. These intricate harmonic devices where all the diatonic chords get a different dominant quality (F7#11 instead of Flydian, Ealtered instead of Ephrygian, D7 instead of D minor...) great tune
Last edited by Djang; 06-28-2020 at 12:49 PM.
-
That B9 is just a tritone sub for F7, the V of the next chord Bb7. If I play it, I prefer B7. The 3rd of B is the melody note which is part of the reason it works. I think of the 9 as a reminder not to add b9 to it. Originally Posted by ragman1
I’m probably swimming beyond my depth here, but I think the B9 is acting as F7alt. The 9 of B is the #5 of F, so it works. The b9 wouldn’t.
You mentioned preferring B7b5. Both the 5 and b5 of B are in F7alt, so either works as a tritone sub.
The F# melodic minor scale works great over that B9. But that’s just another name for the Falt scale, so it makes sense it would!
Melodic Minor – Altered Scale | Jens LarsenLast edited by KirkP; 06-29-2020 at 08:57 PM.
-
My favorite version:
-
Mike Moreno is currently running a course on Zoom called 'Standards from Film'.
This week's tune just happens to be 'Like Someone in Love'.
Mike runs each class three times per week: Tuesday at 1pm EST, Wednesday at 9pm EST and Friday at 11am EST. $28.
I took his class on 'Stella by Starlight' a fortnight ago and thought it was great. Mike plays you scenes from the film so you can hear the original composer's harmony, talks about the film so you can get the original vibe of the song before going through several recorded versions to show how different musicians have interpreted the harmony and how the changes played today differ from the original version. There are PDFs all of the recordings to follow with.
Booking: Standards From Film Series - ONLINE! - A Summer Course By Mike Moreno
-
I think of this book as cocktail piano charts. I don’t mean that as a criticism. I just mean they are usually basic old school chords that always get the job done. When I’m studying a tune I’ll usually compare several fake books to see what I like best. “Anthologie des Grilles” often ends up the winner, since I have old school ears. And I can make subs on the fly if I want to. Originally Posted by grahambop
Last edited by KirkP; 06-29-2020 at 10:51 PM.
-
I know all that, I just don't like the sound of it, not as B9 anyway. It clashes, especially the C#/Db. So either straight B7 or B7b5. B7b5 is probably better as it's a true tritone. Originally Posted by KirkP
But I did like the Am7/D7 backdoor sub, that works.
I suppose you know tritone subs contain exactly the same notes as each other?
F7b5 = F Eb A B
B7b5 = B A Eb F
-
In the end jazz is all about being able to generate melodies in your head on the spot. Improvisation is not a cognitive process on the bandstand. From a forum like this you might get the impression that jazz is all about knowing theory stuff but it is NOT. Typing the changes is not the same as being able to play them. The clips never lie. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
DB
-
Mine do :-)The clips never lie
Not really, of course. If it's a good solo but I fingerslip, or a note sounds completely wrong, I'll tweak it. Otherwise it's do it again.
I don't mind for myself but if it's going to be presented to the world, so to speak, then it may as well be right. Professional studios do that too.
-
Most of this thread is over my head, or zinging past it, but I thought I'd try to contribute.
First off, there's context. Let's assume it's a casual or a jam. Everybody knows the tune. It's a quartet pgbd.
So, the first thing that's likely to happen is that the bassist will do the descending line, but you're going to have to listen to how the pianist plays over it. And, as the tune progresses you're going to have to determine if he varies that, or keeps playing the first couple of chords the same way.
When it's your turn to solo, hopefully you have an idea of what the chords are going to be. If he doesn't play it vanilla, can you recognize immediately what he's doing instead? If you can, then you have a shot at applying the sort of theory that this thread has been focusing on. Or so it seems to me. I can hear what he's doing, but I can't necessarily name it quickly, so I'm going to end up having to find notes by ear. Since, I'm likely to start a solo playing softly and sparsely, that can help. Allows me to hear the piano clearly and pick my notes carefully. If the pianist is off into the clouds harmonically, I'll start by paraphrasing the melody -- hard to go wrong with that. And, if the pianist is playing busily in the middle register, I might go into an upper octave to reduce the liklihood of clashes and mud.
I hear the first two bars pretty much as an Ebmaj with a descending bass line. The next two feel like a continuation of the descending line. Maybe the tonal center goes from Eb to F (or Fm - Ralph Patt has it staying in Eb), two bars each. The melody in bars 5-6 and 7-8 seems like a parallel statement in what I hear as an ascending line. Think Ab6 Am7 Bb6 Bbm7. That leads nicely to Abmaj, then down a half step to G7 and hence to Cmaj. In saying this, I'm not distinguishing between the iim and V7 and I'm similarly equating m7 and the relative M6.
To me, those are the bones of the tune. No matter what the pianist plays, he ought to be reflecting that. So, my role is to find a melody that fits. So, I scat sing, to myself, and try to play that. About the only theory I can apply is knowing the tonal center and chord tones and adding the spice by ear.
I'll admit that I don't really understand the more theoretical approaches. And, I probably would be better off if I did. Nobody says they're for the bandstand. Rather the conventional wisdom is that they are for developing skills and vocabulary in the practice room. A lot of the scale choice discussion seems to revolve around a change of just a note or two from one approach to another. Can't that be done by ear?
FWIW.
Edit: With the guitar in my hands, I ended up with the following.
The first two bars are all Cm7, give or take. For beats 3 and 4 of bar 1 (the G7) you might want to lower the C to a B.
The next thing that makes this tune memorable is that Am7b5. If you started with Cm/C then Cm/B (that's bar 2) then Cm/Bb at the end of bar 2, you can consider that Am7b5 to be a continuation of the descending line, making that chord a Cm6 (same notes).
At that point, the Cm6 becomes a pivot. Suddenly, it's an Am7b5 and it starts what amounts to a 3625 leading to Fm.
Another pivot. The Fm, which begins its life in this tune as a target of a 3625, now becomes something else. In a vanilla world, it's the start of a four bar long ii V I in Eb. Then Eb moves to Eb7 (which feels like a root descending a whole step) and then to Ab, completing a V I.
Commonly, this is played as Fm /Am7 D7 /Gm7/ ii V I in Ab. Why? Well, going back to bar 3, there's a possible guidetone line which can be G (G is over the Am7b5) then Gb F E and, for the Fm, Eb. Continuing down, we get to D (which might be a way to think about why that D7 works) and then the D7 resolves to Gm. Another pivot, since that Gm then becomes part of an Ebmaj9. Or so one might think.
Irealpro has the Fm becoming the beginning of a ii V7 I in Eb. Then, with a move to Eb7 and then to Abmaj.
To review, the first 6 bars can be seen as descending. It "resets" and the descending idea continues. The Ab in bar 9 drops a half step to G7. Maybe the motif is C (in the Ab) to B in the G7 and Cmaj7, then Bb in the Cm7, A in the F7, Ab in the Fm7 and Bb7.
So, one idea is to hear the tune as this slow descent and phrase with that.Last edited by rpjazzguitar; 06-30-2020 at 05:56 PM.
-
Like so many others here, you just typed a solo. I believe the magic of playing strong lines over changes can NEVER be captured in a before-the-fact summing up of scale possibilities. The fact is simply that good players do not play scales. The actual music you hear is the language and the scales are not that. CST may be a good starting point but if you get stuck with it and perceive and handle it as a definitive way to play jazz, you will end up sounding really bad.
Personally I'd take a good solo and listen to what is going on there.
I am not saying CST is without merit. But you have to move beyond all this scale talk. CST is not the jazz language in the end.
I am saying this because the pontification on theory here goes on and on and on ... I find that kind of tiring and some might even think it's the definitive way to go. Well, I listened closely to the clips of all the heavy hitters on theory here and apparently there is no relation between knowing theory and playing well. That's because playing a good solo is a lot harder than typing one.
CST is as much a good starting point as it is a false safety net.
DB
-
I agree with Dick. Rather than sift through volumes of textual descriptions, try lifting some lines from this.
Reply With Quote
Gibson books
Today, 06:53 PM in For Sale