Bebop Dorian Scale

[princeplanet]

OK, I'm led to believe that the most common way the dorian bebop is constructed is by adding the passing note between the (b)3rd and 4th.

Now, it is also my understanding that these scales developed through the desire to land chord tones on down beats.

The Major bebop achieves this with it's added #5 as the dominant bebop does with it's added #7. But the dorian lands the root, 3rd, 4th and 6th when starting on a root or 3rd, and when starting on a 5th or 7th you get 5, 7, 9 and major 3rd!

Clearly this scale is used as a conjunct to the following dom chord in a ii-V progression as, say, D dorian bebop has the same notes as G mixo bebop. I think I notice idiomatic uses of the dorian bebop where landing the 4th simply pre-empts the following dom chord. From this expect that you can't be as free with the dorian bebop as you could the maj or mixo versions, there are some definite "no-no's".

So why aren't other possible variations more commonly found, ie, adding the #7, or adding the #5? The former gives you all chord tones on down beats while the latter gives you the maj 6th in place of the min 7th, ie, the "Dorian" sound.

Please don't say "Just learn them all"... I'm realizing life is too short to learn every way to do things in Jazz! The other answer I'm anticipating is "Play the one that sounds right to you"... trouble is, I like them all, kinda... Maybe what I'm asking is - how do experienced improvisers get around this? What about in a Dorian modal piece, which alteration is most common, the added nat 3rd, the #5, or the #7th?

This has been bugging me for ages and I have yet to see any discussion anywhere about this so I'd appreciate any feelings you have about this.

Thanks.

[Jazzyteach65]

Please don't say "Just learn them all"... I'm realizing life is too short to learn every way to do things in Jazz! The other answer I'm anticipating is "Play the one that sounds right to you"... trouble is, I like them all, kinda... Maybe what I'm asking is - how do experienced improvisers get around this? What about in a Dorian modal piece, which alteration is most common, the added nat 3rd, the #5, or the #7th?

This has been bugging me for ages and I have yet to see any discussion anywhere about this so I'd appreciate any feelings you have about this.
Thanks.

This is my experience with "bebp" scales ect. At first, I learned them on my own, but later through playing found them to be useless through a series of events.

2. When I first learned all the scales and would transcribe, I became concerned as to the artist whom I was transcribing and thier use of the "bebop" scale. I found myself asking why/how could guys like Grant and Wes put passing tones in the bebop scale on the strong beat. I also wondered things like "why were'nt they hitting the chord tones on every strong beat?" Then through a lot of questioning, I realized that A. There is no such thing as a bebop scale. Some theorist coined this term for scales that use passing tones, and that B. a chromatic passing tone exists between each whole step in a scale. This made me realize that if I just played what I felt, then added a few chromatic tones to extend lines and create dramatic effect, that's all I had to worry about. I would say that unless you're deliberatley doing so, never try tpo put more than 4-5 chromatics in succession, because then this sounds too "cocktailish"

I can garauntee you that the early bebop improvisors were not thinking in terms of "bebop" scales, but rather they heard chromatic tones in between chord tones

[princeplanet]

But surely you still see some merit in knowing at least one version of each of these scales? Otherwise it's just arps with chromatic fill ins, come to think of it, that would make life much easier in some ways....

[Jazzyteach65]

Otherwise it's just arps with chromatic fill ins, come to think of it, that would make life much easier in some ways....

My point exactly. Surely, it's good to know them, but I have always theorize that knowledge is useless unless applied. With that said, think of the Mixolydian sound. Add ONE passing tone between flat seventh and root, and you get the "bebop" dom scale (god i hate that term) That's only one note, so you REALLY don't have to practice that bebop dom scale. Now, have you not heard players play a chromatic passing tone between the fourth anf fifth of a dominant line over a 7th chord? But wait, that's not the "bebop" scale!!!!!!!! Exactly-this is where chromatic placement, NOT "bebop" scales come in handy, thusly deeming these bebop scales useless (IMHO)

Here-this video towards the end should REALLY clear up some thinking. It's Fred Hamilton, my old teacher at UNT.

[monk]

Great call on the Fred Hamilton video. Very clear explanation and demonstration. Something for any teacher to aspire to. I also prefer the chord tone/passing tone approach. It really nails the changes, it's flexible and offers limitless melodic possibilities.

When David Baker wrote How to Play Bebop he only mentioned the Bebop Dominant and Bebop Major scales (sorry jazzyteach). The Bebop Dorian arrived later. I'm not sure who first introduced it. I have never been a fan of Bebop Dorian. First, because I prefer the chord tone/passing tone approach and second, I find the major third to be jarring to my ear even when it falls on an up beat.

Something that needs to be kept in mind is that teaching systems are designed for the ease of the teacher not the student. Teachers love to have names to apply to things for ease of presentation. That said, it doesn't necessarily make it easier for the student to grasp.

Jazzyteach is 100% correct in that this is a perfect example of someone attaching a name to something that had been in common practice for years.
Regards,
monk

[princeplanet]

My point exactly. Surely, it's good to know them, but I have always theorize that knowledge is useless unless applied. With that said, think of the Mixolydian sound. Add ONE passing tone between flat seventh and root, and you get the "bebop" dom scale (god i hate that term) That's only one note, so you REALLY don't have to practice that bebop dom scale. Now, have you not heard players play a chromatic passing tone between the fourth anf fifth of a dominant line over a 7th chord? But wait, that's not the "bebop" scale!!!!!!!! Exactly-this is where chromatic placement, NOT "bebop" scales come in handy, thusly deeming these bebop scales useless (IMHO)

Here-this video towards the end should REALLY clear up some thinking. It's Fred Hamilton, my old teacher at UNT.

I'm all for simplifying, or "chunkifying", but he seems to be suggesting you can just arbitrarily place chromatics wherever you like between chord tones. This can teach bad habits where you can become accustomed to hearing the odd wrong note on certain downbeats. Sure, even the bop greats played the odd "wrong" note on a down beat, but they were in control of the dissonance. This control comes from understanding the consonant ways to to use chromaticism, and bebop scales seem a good way in addition to thorough arp knowledge to attaining that understanding, before abandoning it. Parker said learn everything then just blow, but you can't short cut to that point and have Parker's or even Metheny's mastery. Otherwise learning a bunch or arps and filling in the gaps with passing notes willy nilly would instantly make you a Jazz player!

[princeplanet]

This is my experience with "bebp" scales ect. At first, I learned them on my own, but later through playing found them to be useless through a series of events.

2. When I first learned all the scales and would transcribe, I became concerned as to the artist whom I was transcribing and thier use of the "bebop" scale. I found myself asking why/how could guys like Grant and Wes put passing tones in the bebop scale on the strong beat. I also wondered things like "why were'nt they hitting the chord tones on every strong beat?" Then through a lot of questioning, I realized that A. There is no such thing as a bebop scale. Some theorist coined this term for scales that use passing tones, and that B. a chromatic passing tone exists between each whole step in a scale. This made me realize that if I just played what I felt, then added a few chromatic tones to extend lines and create dramatic effect, that's all I had to worry about. I would say that unless you're deliberatley doing so, never try tpo put more than 4-5 chromatics in succession, because then this sounds too "cocktailish"

I can garauntee you that the early bebop improvisors were not thinking in terms of "bebop" scales, but rather they heard chromatic tones in between chord tones

OK, been checking out these things against a Dorian vamp and sure enough, it seems that landing the 9th, 11th and 13th against a basic m6 sound all sound fine. No surprise about the 9 or 13 of course, but the real surprise upon inspection is how cool the 11th sounds on a down beat. It's such a familiar sound. This must be why people love blowing over dorian vamps, you can do little wrong! Still, if you want control over chromatics between the scale tones, there still needs to be some rules! For example, you just can't run down g-f#-F-e or c-b-Bb-a against Am6 where each 4 note group starts on a down beat, nor e-d-c#-c etc. So, again, if we simply confine this discussion to the problem of applying chromatics to an Am6 vamp, how does one practice for it? : b2, nat3, #4, #5, #7 ...... Each additional passing note creates it's own list of "do's and dont's". Are you guys telling me that with all the jazz improv theory ever written, there is no systematic approach to cover practicing their handling?

Eg, you could summarize the rules for 4 consecutive chromatic notes like this:

Never descend chromatically from the 3rd, or 7th in Dorian, or ascend from the 9th or 6th.

That's straight forward enough, but avoiding note groupings like this: e-d-c#-c are more complicated. This is a semitone (ST)- ST-T- , which will sound bad whereas a ST-ST- T group like b-Bb-a-g sounds great. When guys like Wes or Sonny Stitt or Sonny Rollins were playing every conceivable chromatic variation against certain chords, they simply must have had a system firmly ingrained in order to avoid bad groups at break neck speeds.

Is it just that we need to work out our own systems? Maybe people who work this stuff out never give it away freely? Charlie Parker for one never gave anything away, except the recordings of course, but no one can really figure out how he was really thinking. One thing is for sure, he was using his own privately conceived, ingenious systems.

So I guess that's all I'm asking, are there systems out there I can study? Or do I make up some of my own? I'm feeling more and more resigned to the latter....

[oilywrag]

Rather than a list of do's and dont's,treat as a list of good sounds and not so good.There are no bad notes just good ones in the bad place.
Just start out putting one or two notes in at a time,see where they lead and just get the sound in your ear.

Cheers Tom

[Jazzyteach65]

OK, been checking out these things against a Dorian vamp and sure enough, it seems that landing the 9th, 11th and 13th against a basic m6 sound all sound fine. No surprise about the 9 or 13 of course, but the real surprise upon inspection is how cool the 11th sounds on a down beat. It's such a familiar sound. This must be why people love blowing over dorian vamps, you can do little wrong! Still, if you want control over chromatics between the scale tones, there still needs to be some rules! For example, you just can't run down g-f#-F-e or c-b-Bb-a against Am6 where each 4 note group starts on a down beat, nor e-d-c#-c etc. So, again, if we simply confine this discussion to the problem of applying chromatics to an Am6 vamp, how does one practice for it? : b2, nat3, #4, #5, #7 ...... Each additional passing note creates it's own list of "do's and dont's". Are you guys telling me that with all the jazz improv theory ever written, there is no systematic approach to cover practicing their handling?

No, there is a way, just like all things, to practice chromatics. I said that I don't or wouldn't bother practicing bebop scales. Practicing enclosing tones targeting through chromatics and chromatic vocab should be a part of your practice. Now if you practice EVERY chromatic possibility, (on the beat, of the beat, three chroms above a tone, one below, vice versa, from the b2, fron the #5 with emphasis on note placement ect) you'll go insane. What I'm saying is that if you listen and mess around with the chromatics enough, not worry about what goes where, it should come to you.

There are players who abuse chromatics by using too many in succession too often. That to me is boring, however, using it tastefully and sparsely, to create dramatic effect is nice to me. Do you think Wes EVER practiced
note placement with bebop scales from the #2, 5th, with #$ ect? NOPE! He listened to other players, worked out ideas and used his gut feeling

[princeplanet]

No, there is a way, just like all things, to practice chromatics. I said that I don't or wouldn't bother practicing bebop scales. Practicing enclosing tones targeting through chromatics and chromatic vocab should be a part of your practice. Now if you practice EVERY chromatic possibility, (on the beat, of the beat, three chroms above a tone, one below, vice versa, from the b2, fron the #5 with emphasis on note placement ect) you'll go insane. What I'm saying is that if you listen and mess around with the chromatics enough, not worry about what goes where, it should come to you.

There are players who abuse chromatics by using too many in succession too often. That to me is boring, however, using it tastefully and sparsely, to create dramatic effect is nice to me. Do you think Wes EVER practiced
note placement with bebop scales from the #2, 5th, with #$ ect? NOPE! He listened to other players, worked out ideas and used his gut feeling

No I don't think wes was thinking in scales much of the time, but he used so many chromatic/diatonic groupings while seeming never resorting to cliches or obvious repetitive pet ideas that he simply must have had a system, at least in his training his ear, in order for him to have acquired his phenomenal facility to sound effortlessly inexhaustible when it came to improvising. Whereas guys like Benson and perhaps Metheny rely more on memorized "lines", the truly great improvisers trained themselves to "hear" variations that worked. This training in turn evolved to the point where they were just hearing it and finding the notes to express what they were singing in their head. But you just don't get to that stage without discipline, you surely gotta teach your ear first. Ella Fitzgerald was a great singing improvisor, you could argue that she simply heard it in her head first, then simply executed the ideas on her instrument (voice)- therefore, why can't you accept that Wes was the same? Well, I don't buy that. Ella had comparatively a small stock of licks when she scatted when you compare her to say John Coltrane. Without discipline and training Coltrane would not have simply been able to sing all his ideas without shedding them on an instrument first. Again, I insist these guys had systems that were more complex than typical enclosures or approach tricks. Listen to Johnny Smith or Pat Martino, they exhaust every combination of the diatonic/chromatic palette. How did they practice for it?

[Jazzyteach65]

Well, that is two very distinct opposite camps.
Guys like Smith had thier stock licks or "runs."
Martino has worked so much with bebop lines, chromatics-that it's become a second nature for him to unconciously play variations on say, one idea, by using chromatics, cliches ect.

Wes was more-feel oriented, where he could take melodic ideas and not rely on cliches. He did a lot of ornamintation of melodies and heads with chromatics. He still had a stock of licks (over fast tempos he would play 9-b3-5-6 on a minor ii chord) but he, admittingly, got his ideas through working timelessly with his ears. Sionce he didn't have a formal education, let alone the ability to read music, he had to rely on learning from others and listening to others. This made him rely on his ears to create motifs and melodies, rather than use specific formulae too much.

Trane, worked things out diliberately, however I don't think he did, in fact I'm pretty sure he didn't work out chromatic passages dilebreatly. In reading a lot of his bios and musical analysis, he was more of an arp player, digital player (cells) scale patterns in varying numbers (seven-note figures ect) He did put in chromatics but not that much

[monk]

Parker said "I didn't know a thing about harmony, I thought all music was played in key. After I learned the scales, I taught myself to play blues in all the 12 keys. Then I learned 'I Got Rhythm' & 'Cherokee' in all 12 keys. Then I was ready"

Given the time frame Parker most likely was refering to major, minor, whole tone and diminished scales. No mention of "bebop scales" is made. More importantly, CP spoke of the songs he learned.

The quote "Master the instrument, learn the changes, then forget all that shit and just play!" is sometimes attributed to Parker, sometimes to Miles Davis.

I would suggest a second listening to the Fred Hamilton video. He describes very clearly how to handle chromatic tones.

Jazzytech is correct in saying that the great players that we respect learned by listening to the great players who came before them and then tried to replicate what they heard. Babies don't learn the rules of grammar before they learn to speak. They imitate the language around them, then when they enter school they learn grammar.

Rules and systems are not replacements for listening, playing and personal experimentation. There are no shortcuts. As I said in an earler post,
the chord tone/passing tone approach really nails the changes, it's flexible and offers limitless melodic possibilities. I would submit that rules and systems leads to a more rigid approach to improvisation.

When I was at GIT in the early 80s, Howard Roberts, Joe Pass and Joe Diorio told us that the fastest, easiest path to improvisation was to learn the recorded solos of the masters. Who you listen to is your choice.

If learning the bebop dominant scale is what you want to do, then go ahead and do it. But please remember that experience precedes understanding.
Regards,
monk

[princeplanet]

I have transcribed and learned my fave solos, but have realised I cant think like their makers which means I can't really play variations on the style like the originators could. Take Koko, I learned that a while back, really got inside it and tried to adapt and adopt it, but it's not my system, it's Charlie's. Listen to all the versions he did of it, he never ran out of new ways to put it together, even the same formula would be re invented and he's always land on his feet. He had a system. Me, I just want my own humble little system one day where I can confidently explore new material in a solo without fear of playing clangers. The only way I've thought of to achieve this is to develop lots of etudes against common changes in all keys and all gtr positions. It's slow and tedious, infact, it's 70% etudes and 30% improv/learning tunes etc. The etudes mix up all the devices I know and once automatic, give me freedom to explore in my improvs. The etudes also ground my ears and hip them to the sound of what I'm doing to the point where I'm hearing new ideas based on the ideas i shed.
I just wanna come up with some chromatic based etudes along with enclosre/ approach routines, but it's doing my head in!

I hear what you and JT are saying though and appreciate the wisdom in it, but I'm just too far down this track I'm on and I just feel I gotta see it through to a point where I can relax the discipline part and focus more on music making! I just don't have all the chops i think i need to play what I'm starting to hear in my head...

[monk]

Princeplanet,
I hear what you're saying. You've transcribed solos and studied them. How many? Once you've learn a solo have you tried to use the melodic fragments and licks in other songs? That's how Parker, Wes, Christian, Young and everyone else did it.

Wes stated on numerous occasions that he memorized all of Christian's solos and that was all he knew when he began working. So how did he get from there to being Wes? He took that information and used it in every possible place that he could. That coupled with listening to and copying Parker, gave him the material he needed to become himself.

In regard to being too far along to turn back, I would say if it's working for you then by all means continue. However, if it isn't working then taking up another approach would be prudent.

The comment you made about Parker never giving anything away is patently untrue. CP not only discussed his approach to improvisation in interviews but by all accounts of his contemporaries was extremely generous with his knowledge.

I've sensed frustration in many of your posts. As a teacher, that would suggest to me that something isn't working. Either your approach or your goals are not clearly defined or when you learn a transcribed solo you don't use the information in other situations.

If you don't have people to jam your favorite tunes with, then you need to have playalongs of your favorite tunes to practice your ideas. It's critical to hear the lines played against the chords repeatedly to internalize them both physically and aurally.

Regards,
monk

[princeplanet]

I work with BIAB a lot and have transcribed about a dozen solos that I can play by heart at tempo. I just feel like a fake trying to even quote small fragments. I am frustrated, true, but not at all disheartened, I actually like that I'm going down a "different street".... but just need some pointers from time to time. For example, you say CP "shared" his improv insights with others. Where? How? To Whom? What was it? When did he divulge this? Is it in a book, an interview? Is it hearsay? Man, I would love to know what he was thinking, then I'll go back and restudy the transcriptions!

[monk]

PP,
You say that you "feel like a fake" when you try to use fragments from other people's solos. Why? Have you bought into the fallacy that improvisation is playing something that no one has ever played before or that somehow inspiration will strike and you will suddenly be able to miraculously play golden melodies that will cause women to swoon & strong men to weep?

Music is a language just like English, Spanish, French, Japanese or German. All spoken languages have words, spelling, grammar, sentences, pronunciation. When you have a conversation with someone you aren't making up the words as you speak. You are responding "instantly" by drawing upon the reservoir of words in your vocabulary. Improvising music works the same way. Improvisation is the spontaneous reorganization of your musical vocabulary. In other words, the rearrangement of something that already exists.

When we speak, we generally do so intuitively and it seems to be an automatic process. However, if you consider how babies learn to speak, it is neither intuitve nor automatic. Language is learned by imitation. We repeat the words and phrases we hear our parents speak. Upon entering school, language is then further developed through spelling, grammar and the enlargement of the vocabulary.

Django Reinhardt, Wes Montgomery, Lester Young, Louis Armstrong, Charlie Christian, Charles Parker and other great improvisers did not drop out of the sky fully formed. Each one developed his craft by listening to and learning from the people who came before them. No artist develops in a vacuum.

Think of copying solos and learning licks and phrases as acquiring vocabulary. Don't just learn a lick. Disassemble it, reassemble it , play it backward, analyse it to see why it sounds good, see if it will work over other chords. In other words, do the same thing with music that you've done with spoken language your entire life.

Remember, every great guitarist started out copying someone else. That's how they acquired their basic vocabulary. They became themselves by using their own minds to develop what they learned.

Regarding CP and his approach to music. There are numerous biographies and articles in magazines that can be accessed either online or in a public library. Go get 'em.

Regards,
monk

[wizard3739]

Monk has said things in his post that every improvisor should (IMHO) accept as gospel for jazz improvisation. Thank you Monk, for stating so clearly the concept I believe to be the MOST important thing you should do when seriously studying to play jazz.

wiz

[derek]

Reading interviews with Wes, Barney and Herb Ellis, they all said that their early playing consisted of only playing Charlie Christain's solos. However, they turned out to be 3 very distinct players.

Our own eccentricities of technique and ear will insure that we will not wind up clones. Sco talks about not playing endless warp speed lines, not because he doesn't want to, he said he did in his youth, but because technically he never could. So you get more horn like phrases from Sco with breaks in between due to this "technical deficiency".

Benson has said numerous times that he developed his technique because he can't string skip well enough. Benson has one of the slickest and fastest technique out there, but he chuckles when guys want to copy, what for him is technique that evolved from compensating for not being able to do one thing well. Pat Metheny will tell you not to copy his right hand, as his approach is less than idea.

So when we study the masters, I see a couple of things happening. One, assimilating more than one creates a synthesis of the varieties of those approaches, and two, our own technical and musical personality differences will guarantee that we will not wind up becoming clones. I guess if one just transcribed/studied/played Wes exclusively, then there might be a risk of becoming just a karaoke Wes, but even that would probably only be a phase.

[JohnW400]

I have transcribed and learned my fave solos, but have realised I cant think like their makers which means I can't really play variations on the style like the originators could. Take Koko, I learned that a while back, really got inside it and tried to adapt and adopt it, but it's not my system, it's Charlie's. Listen to all the versions he did of it, he never ran out of new ways to put it together, even the same formula would be re invented and he's always land on his feet. He had a system. .

What might help you is to take a riff that you like, rather than the whole solo, and then play it in all twelve keys but by backcying.

C F Bb Eb Ab Db Gb B E A D G

Also in starting on different fingers. Just as an example, the "Coltrane riff" 1 2 3 5.

Start with C on the 8th fret and do CDEG, FGAC, Bb CDF, Eb FG Bb ect.

Here's a Parker type riff ( C Db F Ab C Eb D Db) He uses it against Bbmi7 and Dbma7.

You should really do this with all the riffs you like. Eventually they'll just start to come out in your playing.

[monk]

But there are holes in my ability to develop lines on the spot.

PP,
I think you're still missing a very important point. Do you make up words on the spot when you're having a conversation?

Solos contain the language of improvisation. NO ONE improvises 100% of the time.

If you aren't capable of playing an extemporized solo that you are happy with, then you are not capable of writing an etude that will lift you up to the level you desire. That's master level stuff.

You're beginning to remind me of a dog chasing it's own tail. I afraid that if you ever catch your tail you won't have much to show for the chase.

You will become whatever you practice. You seem to be very interested In Charles Parker's style of playing. LISTEN to him. He's not a scalar player. So why are you trying to arrive there through scales?

There is a path to jazz improvisation, well-trodden and over 100 years old. The path is listening & repeating, listening & repeating.

Less time with books, more time with recordings.

Rgards,
monk

[princeplanet]

Yep, some transcribing, some employment of devices, either learned or made up, that's kinda where I'm at. I agree that it's more useful to analyse solos in order to extract an idea as opposed to rote line duplication, it's just that many of the solos I admire are so darn confounding (eg Benson), it's difficult to take anything useful away for your trouble.

What I have realised is that I wanted a better sense of chromaticism, basically to avoid land the wrong 3rd or 7th on downbeats. Sure, one way to do this is to be a strict chord tone- passing note player, but I personally like to break from that sometimes and just bust out a run of notes, it's just how i hear it. The opening question is a product of this thinking, ie, how do you practice this kinda chromatic "facility" in certain situations? I already pointed out that just filling in between chord tones doesn't always work, eg, chromatic descending in a minor chord from the 7th or 3rd or ascending say from a M6th can sound horrible. It's not enough to just try to avoid these notes, the point is, how do you learn to avoid them? Hence the idea of the "bebop scales" to get you out of trouble. Now the bebop dorian only offers one passing note (M3rd) where there are 4 others that can work in various ways, and can all be practiced. But first things first, is there a way to get the dorian bebop in your head and in your fingers. Most on this forum didn't offer any specific ideas, but "steve" from another forum offered this:


1. Start your line on a chord tone from the relative dom7.
Am6 (dorian) = start on D F# A or C

2. Run up and down the Am bebop scale to your hearts desire, in stepwise scale fashion. (yes you do highlight the root, b3, 6 and 11 - very dorian no?)

3. If starting line on a different chord tone to the relative dom insert one extra chromatic note before the first RD chord tone. OR play the straight dorian scale until you hit the b7 of the RD (C) then back into the bebop minor, OR use a change in rhythm (syncopation) in order to set up the next note on a downbeat.

4. If starting on the 3rd (or any other D7 tone really) of the RD (F#), play chromatically down to the 6th (B) if you would like to emphasise the 5th of the minor chord (E) instead of the 11 (D).

5. When starting on non diatonic notes use common sense and insert an extra passing note the opposite side of the chord tone. Eg, if start on F, play F Eb E and off you go! Or use syncopation.

6. When arriving at the b7 of the RD, you can acend up a major 7 chord buit on this note. In Am Dorian this would be a Cmaj7 arp.

7. When arriving at the 3rd or 5th of the RD you may ascend a dim7 arp.


See, that's what I was asking for, and these are cool ideas. The key notes from the dorian bebop are actually the chord tones from the relative dom7. starting on any of these notes in the dorian bebop against either the ii or V chord seems to work. Any even numbered run of notes land these good tones (even the M6th and 11th against minor) and there are dozens of ways to sequence or double back within this scale that not only sound good, but sound decidedly "bop".
Now I'm not saying that's all i need to improvise!! But it's a way to get me out of jail when I want to bust a short or long run of notes to connect my other ideas. Kinda like having chromatic "training wheels". Next for me is to work up some routines for the major bebop (lydian and ionian) and mix em all up with complete ii-V-I's around the circle of 5ths in all positions. Don't worry, I'm also working on my Wes transcriptions, and yes, I do notice he didn't need any of what I'm practicing, and that's ok, I don't wanna be a Wes clone, even if I could be!

[VKat]

I've read a hundred Internet forum posts that dicsuss the so-called Bebop Dorian scale:
| R-2-b3-3-4-5-6-b7 | -R...

In each of 100 threads the original poster questioned the applicability of this scale over minor 7th chord that's traditionally associated with the Dorian mode in Jazz.
Why? Because if the driving idea behind Bebop scale is to outline the chord tones in an "endless" run over a static harmony then this version of the Bebop scale is obviously flawed:
- as soon as you get to the beat 3 (using all 8th notes) you start using "wrong" notes (from the scale application point of view) on strong beats: 11th on beat 3 and 13th on beat 4 (the latter is of course less critical).

Can you please make it clear for me (as opposed to other 100 internet threads on this exact subject; they all failed):

- why the so-called Bebop Dorian (first identified by David Baker in his vol.1 of "How to Play Bebop") was made possible at all? What did D.Baker had in his mind when mentioning it?
He has no specific examples of using it over min7 chords in his book, he just mentions it.
Was it a joke?

Please focus on this specific applicability: Bebop Dorian with natural 3rd over min7 (ii).

What possible answers I already know to save your typing effort:

- this is a mode of Bebop Dominant with exactly the same notes; however the Bebop 7th works great over 7th chords - there is no "chord tones displacement flaw".

- there is another so-called Bebop Dorian with a natural 7th: | R-2-b3-4-5-6-b7-7 | -R...
No problems with that one just like with the Dominant version - all chords tones on strong beats.

- there is no such thing as Bebop scale; - Yes I know! However since D.Baker uses that term I see no problems using his terminology to discuss the fenomenon. I also use the so-called to show I'm not a fanatic.

- every passing note can be added to create a so-called Bebop scale; Yes, that's fine - but why did David Baker pick up that particular one with the natural 3rd? Was he just lazy to add the natural 7th instead?

The funny thing is that there are a few Web sites of the new wave of Internet Jazz educators who parrot the D.Baker's definition of the Bebop Dorian but once someone in the comments of such an article asks a question about application of the scale and mentions the obvious flaw the typical answer of the Internet educator goes like this:

"Yes, you are right. However if you think you can use any passing chromatic note to make up a Bebop scale. Blah...Blah...Blah..."

"You are right?" - Then why do you parrot the concept that has no specific application and has obvious flaws? Otherwise if you think it's applicable then why can't you show how?

I think the "Bebop Dorian with the natural 3rd" should be made illegal if no one can give a clear and convincing answer about its applicability over min7 chords.
Ok, if the idea really was to place the 11th and 13th on up-beats - I have no problem with that but - why no one can admit that?

[vintagelove]

Regardless of rhythmic accents etc, I would most of the time hear that as "mixolydian bebop?", basically the eb is acting as a #2.... The problem with the "all beats fall on chord tones", it assumes your always starting on beat 1. Sometimes you do, sometimes you don't. "I" rarely play the described scale in a minor setting, but who knows what pops out sometimes. Bottom line if your singing it, it's great!!!

[VKat]

vol.1, page 1:

"The scale is also used on a related minor seventh chord (II)..."
and below that, bottom of the page Rule #2, which clarifies the construction: it uses the same notes as the Dominant Bebop scale.

I think the real problem is not that D.Baker first mentioned it but that everyone else parrots him without understanding of how to apply that scale over min7 chords.

could you give the page of "how to play bebop" where this scale is mentioned? can't seem to find it.

[mr. beaumont]

So, I'll catch a little heat for this, but...

I'm not a fan of these "bebop scales," or the teaching of them, really. And yes, I realize some big names teach them. They really seem to me to be an attempt to "academicize" a concept that's not academic. It's aural. To me they just seem to be a way of putting a common passing tone into scale fingerings. And for that, I suppose they're useful.

But if I might high horse a minute, I really think if you want to learn to play bebop, you gotta cop licks from the masters and make sense of them on your own terms. 9 out of 10 posts I see about bebop scales are about frustration and confusion. So how useful are they?

I'm looking at a transcription of Bird playing Anthropology right now. He plays a scale sequentially, without skips or leaps only about three or four times in a 2 chorus solo. Each time he does it, it's for less than one bar.

I dunno, but I think the answers for playing bebop are right there in the music.