How to play over Min7b5 (half diminished) chords, Gibson 175, FractalAudio

[Christian Miller]

Btw in Manouche jazz you have this grip for A9

5 4 5 4 5 x
When you play this grip all the time as well
X 4 5 4 5 x
Both as a Dm6 and a Bm7b5, the penny will drop

That is theory in a sense - it’s just done on the fretboard graphically like spotting that
2 x 2 2 1 x
Has
X x 2 2 1 x
In it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pamosmusic]

Yeah I think one thing here is people keep talking about scales, but I am talking about melodic material. So you have something that you learned in the context of a minor chord for example, and then apply to dominants around the cycle, or to m7b5 chords - that sort of thing. This might be something out of the scale, or a chord tone/approach tone figure or something like a CESH line on minor. Doesn’t matter.

This can be done with very little apparent theory. You just do it. See George Benson, Manouche jazzers etc. a lot of old school bop players did it this way, and would look at you funny if you talked about melodic minor modes. They just got really good at applying language.

The process of coming up with material from scales and arpeggios is separate. You don’t have to be able to do this to be a great jazz player, but it is a way to transcend the limitations of the first approach when you are already sounding good, that is you are a gigging - young professional - jazz player who wants to expand their musical resources.

That’s the way it used to work. That’s what Berklee was intended to be as I understand it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Right, so like … descending C B G E (D# F#) E

Parentheses are an enclosure.

Not terribly useful immediately to say that it’s a minor line in the Aeolian mode. Just that it’s minor …

Works over C as a I chord
Works over Em as a ii chord
works over A7 as a V chord
works over Eb7 as a V chord
works over Am as a ii chord or anything else
works over C#m7b5

The specific interaction of the C and the F# with the chords underneath is less important than their application to the melody in really idiomatic ways that sound compelling to our ears. I think generally we hear “ah it’s minor” before we hear “waaaaaait a second wrong mode.”

[Tal_175]

Yeah I think one thing here is people keep talking about scales, but I am talking about melodic material. So you have something that you learned in the context of a minor chord for example, and then apply to dominants around the cycle, or to m7b5 chords - that sort of thing. This might be something out of the scale, or a chord tone/approach tone figure or something like a CESH line on minor. Doesn’t matter.

OK let me put it this way. If you were teaching this approach to an ambiguous student, how would you show them to apply the minor idea to dominants? Would you tell them that it's a good idea to "reorient" the lick to the new root (not talking about alteration as described in post #49) or would you encourage them to just think dominant as minor from the fifth and apply the lick as if they are playing over a minor chord?

Of course the point is not minorization, it's derivative vs root orientation. It could be just as easily applying dominant ideas to minors.

[pamosmusic]

OK let me put it this way. If you were teaching this approach to an ambiguous student, how would you show them to apply the minor idea to dominants? Would you tell them that it's a good idea to "reorient" the lick to the new root (not talking about alteration as described in post #49) or would you encourage them to just think dominant as minor from the fifth and apply the lick as if they are playing over a minor chord?

Of course the point is not minorization, it's derivative vs root orientation. It could be applying dominant ideas to minors.

Okay so if I have a student — we’ll say they are newish to jazz but pretty skilled and we’ve been working on fundamentals a bit — here is my trajectory for a lick they like.

1. learn it in the best fingering and play it with the recording a lot.
2. Learn it in several other good fingerings and play it with the recording a lot.
3. Use those fingerings to apply it as-is to common chord types. For the line above, I might have them play a line with that line as the ii and then make up stuff for the V and I. Then I’ll have them play it off the fifth of the V, and fill in the ii and I, etc.
4. Then I’ll have them take the lick through a scale diatonically so they get it applied to different chord types and whatnot.
5. Then pick the ones of those that they like or that sound good, and go back to step 3.

If at any point the lick gets boring, then it’s time to move on. Not everything will get the full rotation. Most things won’t.

[Christian Miller]

OK let me put it this way. If you were teaching this approach to an ambiguous student, how would you show them to apply the minor idea to dominants? Would you tell them that it's a good idea to "reorient" the lick to the new root (not talking about alteration as described in post #49) or would you encourage them to just think dominant as minor from the fifth and apply the lick as if they are playing over a minor chord?

I would not front end any more theoretical information than strictly necessary. I’ll give you a concrete example

Learning the V-II relationship - “Let’s learn a D minor line from this solo/head by ear- OR - I’ll sing it, you play it.

Great. Now, minor stuff a fourth down/fifth up sounds great on dominants.

This is the ii V relationship, like a ii V I.

Let’s try it on G7. So we play Dm on G7.

Cool, now we’ll apply to the bridge of rhythm changes, OK what are they? I’ll start you off, Am on D7, then….?’

Obviously there’s theory there, but it’s one bit of info and it’s mental arithmetic not conceptual stuff. You just practice it until it’s second nature. You have to learn the ii V relationship to play jazz and easily read charts, so it serves multiple roles. The ear is arbiter of whether or not stuff ‘works’ and ‘sounds good’ not theory.

I wouldn’t explain why it works unless pushed. Even then… theoretical explanations do tend to eat time in lessons (especially when you know way too much of it like me haha) and tends to give the impression that this stuff is more important than it is. And it is also something you CAN learn from a book or YouTube video.

The fact is that even if someone understands the theory in broad terms, they still have to do it. You might understand the tritone sub as coming from the altered scale or whatever, but you still have to practice the tritone sub triad etc as a specific case. In terms of actually learning to play this info is I think not that relevant until later but the practical application and time on the instrument is indispensable.

Of course the point is not minorization, it's derivative vs root orientation. It could be just as easily applying dominant ideas to minors.

Sure. It’s an example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

And of you could totally say things like ‘can you make this major line into a minor and a dominant line?’ there’s not an iron curtain between the two approaches. But I’d keep it to those three chord qualities at the outset- there’ll be enough to get on with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tal_175]

3. Use those fingerings to apply it as-is to common chord types. For the line above, I might have them play a line with that line as the ii and then make up stuff for the V and I. Then I’ll have them play it off the fifth of the V, and fill in the ii and I, etc.

Hey Peter,
I was just writing a response to this with a concrete example but then I saw Christian's post. I'll reply to that instead because he gave a concrete example already.

[Ukena]

Btw in Manouche jazz you have this grip for A9
5 4 5 4 5 x
When you play this grip all the time as well
X 4 5 4 5 x
Both as a Dm6 and a Bm7b5, the penny will drop [...]

perhaps you meant
X 2 3 2 3 x
as Dm6 and Bm7b5.

or maybe you were just talking about the grip in general, and that the penny will drop if you use the grip on the second fret...

[Tal_175]

Great. Now, minor stuff a fourth down/fifth up sounds great on dominants.

This is the ii V relationship, like a ii V I.

Let’s try it on G7. So we play Dm on G7.

Cool, now we’ll apply to the bridge of rhythm changes, OK what are they? I’ll start you off, Am on D7, then….?’

Great, that's exactly what I wanted to focus on.
So we assume that the student already:
- Has fretboard references for the minor chord since they are able to apply it "thinking minor chord" in different areas of the fretboard.
- Knows the intervals on the fretboard well enough to find the 4th/5th in the context of the dominant chord and superimpose the minor idea.

Why do you think it is better for them to do the mental gymnastics of superimposing that melodic idea fifth up the current root instead of doing the mental gymnastic of learning that exact lick with respect to the dominant root directly?

I mean, isn't the type of mental gymnastic they are taught to do a very critical decision? They will potentially spend the next 3-4 years getting better at internalizing that mental orientation and fretboard organization. It certainly shouldn't be a coin toss (not saying that's what you are suggesting).

Do you think the protection the students gets by doing the minor the stuff off the 5th of the chord saves enough time to justify not developing fretboard references based on the actual harmony of the song form?

[Christian Miller]

perhaps you meant
X 2 3 2 3 x
as Dm6 and Bm7b5.

or maybe you were just talking about the grip in general, and that the penny will drop if you use the grip on the second fret...

Yes whoops


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

Is being able to recognise a II V in any key and apply ii V relationships mental gymnastics?

Maybe, but I would say it’s essential to know anyway to play charts. So it’s not new information just a reuse of already learned information or stuff that will be applied elsewhere. You might not even use that language, but you have to know that, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tal_175]

Is being able to recognise a II V in any key and apply ii V relationships mental gymnastics?

Maybe, but I would say it’s essential to know anyway to play charts. So it’s not new information just a reuse of already learned information or stuff that will be applied elsewhere. You might not even use that langauge, but you have to know that, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not just talking about ii V's. I'm talking about the master scale approach as you mentioned earlier.

I’d stick my oar in for the derivative - that is “master scale” - approach, as you maximise utility of material (scales, voicings, licks etc) at the expense of a bit of mental arithmetic (that you need to drill a lot, in my experience).

So for example mastering minor references and never bothering developing dominant references but just using minor up a fifth.

Or learning MM licks and applying them from the b9 of a dominant instead of seeing the licks as they relate to the dominant chord (b9, 3rd, #5 of the chord etc) because that saves time (not sure exactly how).


Coincidentally I found out that Mike Stern also talks about this:
"Some players improvise over the G7alt chord while thinking of the Ab Melodic Minor scale (the melodic minor scale located a half step above G). The logic is that both scales contain the same notes, so this is seen a shortcut to accessing the notes of the G Altered scale.While it’s true that the notes of the G Altered and Ab Melodic Minor scales are identical, I don’t favor this approach because it means thinking Ab minor instead of G dominant while soloing.Thinking of a superimposed melodic minor scale instead of the actual chord/scale itself introduces an unnecessary extra step in our thought process..
"
...
"
Viewing the G Altered scale from its root also helps us to memorize and visualize its intervals on the neck, which in turn makes transposing it to other keys much easier. For instance, when you play the G Altered scale, you can see that after the root note, the first interval is a half step, which is the b9; the next note is a whole step movement, which is the #9, and so on. Seeing the altered scale as scale, shape and sound in its own right will help you understand where these intervals sit in relation to any dominant chord. I encourage all my students to learn all modal scales from the root, as this really helps them to get inside the sound of the scale in relation to the chord.
"

[Christian Miller]

(Tbh we also teach soloing probably too early, but that’s the reality of world we are dealing with, few want to be a rhythm guitarist for a year or two before starting improv)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mr. beaumont]

"Some players improvise over the G7alt chord while thinking of the Ab Melodic Minor scale (the melodic minor scale located a half step above G). The logic is that both scales contain the same notes, so this is seen a shortcut to accessing the notes of the G Altered scale.While it’s true that the notes of the G Altered and Ab Melodic Minor scales are identical, I don’t favor this approach because it means thinking Ab minor instead of G dominant while soloing.Thinking of a superimposed melodic minor scale instead of the actual chord/scale itself introduces an unnecessary extra step in our thought process..
"
...
"
Viewing the G Altered scale from its root also helps us to memorize and visualize its intervals on the neck, which in turn makes transposing it to other keys much easier. For instance, when you play the G Altered scale, you can see that after the root note, the first interval is a half step, which is the b9; the next note is a whole step movement, which is the #9, and so on. Seeing the altered scale as scale, shape and sound in its own right will help you understand where these intervals sit in relation to any dominant chord. I encourage all my students to learn all modal scales from the root, as this really helps them to get inside the sound of the scale in relation to the chord.
"

This is a big deal to me...it gets away from the "play this over this" thinking which never made much sense to me...as a guy who doesn't usually map in scales, Stern's approach allows me to see the G altered chord in the scale...that just makes more sense to me.

[Christian Miller]

I’m not going to quote all that so…

Point 1: yes I was expecting you to make that point… which is fair.

First aspect, answering from the pov of general pedagogy, there are a very limited number of sub formulae you REALLY need to know to be conversant in bop, off the top of my head (I will probably have forgotten some lol)
1) ii V
2) tritone
3) minor to half dim
4) minor ii V to backdoor
And combinations (dom on half dim, tritone’s minor etc)

That’s not it, but it will get you up and running (note nothing on tonic chords, that can be introduced later imo.) So it’s not too much, it’s not like that Ben Monder doc haha, keep applying until these formulae are second nature on obvious tunes. Do one at a time.

Second aspect - tradition and learning tradition. These things are all based on venerable sub formulae. You can see the masters applying this stuff in their solos and compositions, quite clearly.

Does that make it ‘better’? Well as I say it’s a well trodden path. Some things in music are done because of tradition, and this is an excellent way to learn the basics bop, swing etc. Which is what I was talking about above.

So we are coming back to the meta point which is it better to devote time to:
1) specific cases
2) general theory

In the case of getting it together it’s clear that you will have to teach both or 1). In the long term fretboard mapping may mean that it’s easier to apply general theory in one’s playing ‘at the speed of jazz’ to quote the dreaded Reg, but I have to say most of what I do certainly on fast tunes is heavily internalised. Adam Rogers said as much himself, which makes me not worry about that fact.

Point 2) Other masters disagree with Mike. This is the way of the arts, and I’m all for it. FWIW I tend to see the altered sound as distinct from the melodic minor modes - I think you miss some of the sound if you look at it as melodic minor. But I would teach tritone first. As Barry did.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

I’ll add there’s clearly more than one way up this hill… I’m just outlining a process that has a lot of weight and history behind it.

In the long run you need not to be thinking about any of this stuff, parallel, derivative etc outside of the practice room - and a lot of what we should be doing after the rude mechanics are mastered is developing flexibility. But I am talking about the rude mechanics.

Also I’m discussing the development of quite a specific skill set. This isn’t the alpha and omega of learning the guitar and playing music.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

Sorry to post again but I’m doing a think (oh dear)

It strikes me that beyond the niceties of exactly how things are done the important central themes are that teaching of students to what you might call ‘participatory competence’ should have a clear set of priorities, learning goals and ways to get there. These may vary wildly between highly effective teachers, but I think that has to be present.

Otoh beyond that point learning goals are more nebulous and open ended. In fact, activities that are appropriate and well suited to earlier stages of learning may be stereotyped and unhelpful for students at later stages.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mick-7]

Christian, You don't have a PhD in philosophy, do you? If not, I think you deserve an honorary one from a major university.

P.S. - That's meant as a compliment, I say that because folks here often seem to misinterpret my remarks - must be my delivery.

[rpjazzguitar]

You have a choice. You can learn the G7alt scale or you can apply Abmelmin. Better, for this case, to know the alt scale and be thinking about the root.

But, then you'll have to do the same for whichever modes of melmin you use. So, now, when you see, say, Bb7susb9, you have to know that scale (mode?) and not just apply Abmelmin again. It seems easier to memorize 7 rules of thumb (eg mel min a step below 7susb9) than seven different scales. But, it sacrifices thinking from the root.

There is an argument that thinking from the root is overrated, since it's a pool of notes to select from, not an ordered list. If you know the sounds that works fine, but if you already know the sounds none of this math is necessary.

Alt, I think, is the worst example because the chord name is unwieldy. Galt, for example is G7b9#9#11b13 (somebody will probably correct my spelling), which is a brainful to think about.

But, for the rest of the modes, it's simpler. Take G7susb9. You can start in your mind with mixolydian and make the adjustments indicated in the chord name. Chord tones are G C D F Ab. There are only two other notes in the parent mel min (Fmelmin) and those are Bb and Eb. You sort of get the Bb for free, since the #9 and b9 usually both work. There's no avoid note in melodic minor, but if there was one, it might be this Eb. A common way to play G7susb9 on guitar is xx6533 (Ab C D G). If you raise the D to an Eb, the chord becomes Ab C Eb G which is our old friend Abmaj7. Not the same sound.

For Abmaj7#5, it's the same sort of thing and so on through the modes of melodic minor.

So, it's my usual point. If you just think scale name and the most consonant extensions, you usually end up with 6 eyebrow-normal (not raised) notes, give or take. A few of the others are "arched eyebrow" and the rest are more easily usable.

Then, you put those 6 (and whichever others you want) in the context of the harmony of the tune and make melody. This much theory gets you in the non-clam ballpark and then you use your ears.

[Mick-7]

Coincidentally I found out that Mike Stern also talks about this: "Some players improvise over the G7alt chord while thinking of the Ab Melodic Minor scale (the melodic minor scale located a half step above G). The logic is that both scales contain the same notes, so this is seen a shortcut to accessing the notes of the G Altered scale. While it’s true that the notes of the G Altered and Ab Melodic Minor scales are identical, I don’t favor this approach because it means thinking Ab minor instead of G dominant while soloing. Thinking of a superimposed melodic minor scale instead of the actual chord/scale itself introduces an unnecessary extra step in our thought process."

I don't see it as an either/or, one can do both: think that the G7alt scale is the 7th mode of the Ab mel. minor scale. Hearing it, not thinking it, is paramount.

There is actually only one scale you need to practice: the 12 tone scale. Learn to extract the right notes from it under any harmonic circumstance and you're all set.

[pamosmusic]

For me this stuff is both/and, which I think is worth nothing because I doubt anyone would disagree.

So should you learn that minor lick and be able to apply it on the fifth of the dominant to get a dominant sound.

Or should you organize the same lick around the dominant as a root so that it is dominant in quality.

Obviously both are good for developing vocabulary.

But my experience with students is that the first is easier to access for folks earlier. It also introduces folks to the idea that these ideas (and any others they might derive from it) can all be applicable in lots of other situations and whatnot.

[Tal_175]

But, then you'll have to do the same for whichever modes of melmin you use. So, now, when you see, say, Bb7susb9, you have to know that scale (mode?) and not just apply Abmelmin again. It seems easier to memorize 7 rules of thumb (eg mel min a step below 7susb9) than seven different scales. But, it sacrifices thinking from the root.

It is one thing to memorize the rule, it's a whole another thing to be able to improvise over Bb7susb9 with good sounding ideas while connecting to other chords in the progression.

People talk about this derivative MM application as if it is free lunch. Like just learn MM in 7 positions (or however number of positions), then memorize 7 application rules, off you go. But that's not what happens in real life.

If you want to use the second mode of MM to improvise over Bb7susb9 chords, a lot drilling has to happen before one can use the concept in real performance. In my experience, thinking from the root doesn't slow down this drilling process, be it applying language to the right interval of the chord or working with arpeggio/scale type of line construction. It's almost like you get root orientation for free if you choose view from the root while drilling language.

[pamosmusic]

There is actually only one scale you need to practice: the 12 tone scale. Learn to extract the right notes from it under any harmonic circumstance and you're all set.

Revolutionary.

[rpjazzguitar]

It is one thing to memorize the rule, it's a whole another thing to be able to improvise over Bb7susb9 with good sounding ideas while connecting to other chords in the progression.

People talk about this derivative MM application as if it is free lunch. Like just learn MM in 7 positions (or however number of positions), then memorize 7 application rules, off you go. But that's not what happens in real life.

If you want to use the second mode of MM to improvise over Bb7susb9 chords, you need a lot drilling to do before you can use the concept in real performance. In my experience, thinking from the root doesn't slow down this drilling process, be it applying language to the right interval of the chord or working with arpeggio/scale type of line construction. It's almost like you get root orientation for free if you choose view from the root while drilling language.

Tbh, I don't know the weaknesses of my approach. What I'm likely to do when I see Bb7susb9 is think "Bb7, but it's got a 4th and a b9". From that, I get Bb Eb F Ab B. That's as far as my thinking usually goes. From there, I'll probably play a chord tone and, once I have that note in my mind and I can hear the chord (either imagining it or in the piano) I'll fill the rest in by ear.

Even though I know this is second mode melmin I never think about that in this particular case. Of course, my knowledge isn't even across chords and keys, so, for example, if it's G7susb9 I might actually think Fmelmin which I know is two flats, Bb and Ab and white keys. I don't recommend this spotty approach to others.

[Tal_175]

Tbh, I don't know the weaknesses of my approach. What I'm likely to do when I see Bb7susb9 is think "Bb7, but it's got a 4th and a b9". From that, I get Bb Eb F Ab B. That's as far as my thinking usually goes. From there, I'll probably play a chord tone and, once I have that note in my mind and I can hear the chord (either imagining it or in the piano) I'll fill the rest in by ear.

Even though I know this is second mode melmin I never think about that in this particular case. Of course, my knowledge isn't even across chords and keys, so, for example, if it's G7susb9 I might actually think Fmelmin which I know is two flats, Bb and Ab and white keys. I don't recommend this spotty approach to others.

It seems like you also use a parallel approach of sorts. In your earlier post I was under the impression that you were suggesting thinking melodic minor from the 7th to be the easier way but maybe I misunderstood it.