-
Thank you. Just in time :-)
-
06-14-2024 09:57 AM
-
Actually, I've been looking at the first four bars too. I've seen some great versions, like Bb6 Bo | Cm C#o | Bb/D Dbo | Cm B7. And so on.
-
Alas, not quite. I'd already quoted it. No take backs.
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Are these chord changes or what the transcriber thinks the soloist is thinking? That diminished move is like, the first chord sub we learn. Originally Posted by ragman1
-
This is what I'm trying to explain. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
He's not sure what it's expressing. A really good transcription would have chord symbols for what the rhythm section is playing. The Sonny Rollins Omnibook thing I posted is what the rhythm section is playing, so you can see what he's playing against it ... which is to say, not usually exactly what the rhythm section is playing.
Not to mention that the bass and piano might not be playing precisely the same thing either.
-
Changes I've seen sometime or other in the past. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
Here’s Charlie Parker on “Kim” … again first rhythm changes I found and first page of the solo. In this case the chord symbols reflect what he’s playing, rather than the rhythm section.
Note the second time he hits bar six of the form … Eb to Cb … not one we’ve mentioned. But MY GOD why does it work?
** because we’re just trying to get back to Bb **
For real yall. This is everywhere. Look at the actual music and this is what you’ll see.
Call that bar Eb7 and start there. Learn all the little moves as you’re able to incorporate them and for the love of god do not worry about what the real book says you should play on those two beats.
-
Rhythm Changes is a classic sticking point because no one seems to be taught chord progressions these days.
In fact it is no different to the blues in this respect. But then no-one seems to be taught how to play blues either. You can use either the IVm or #IVo7 in bar 6, for instance. Or just stay on IV7. Just like rhythm changes.
So Peter is of course correct, it's a move from I - IV - I. Comes up in basically every tune.
There's a two popular ways to add a passing chord that move that have been around since... well, before jazz. But in jazz they are treated interchangeably.
I I7 IV IV- I
I I7 IV #IVo7 I
Which you choose depends on the melody of the song, but in soloing you can have one over the other and you frequently hear it on the classic recordings. Everybody did it, Louis, Bird, Rollins, Miles, you name it. Not today's jazz grads of course haha, they are taught to WORRY ABOUT EVERYTHING. But Wynton does it, as if to make a point lol.
---- EXTRA STUFF----
Ok, but this is chords talk, which is usually a bit general and hazy. The thing to focus on is the bassline and the voice leading. That's where these come from.
So, most modern jazz musicians aren't taught the original form of these progressions which go back long before jazz - I know I wasn't. It uses a so called cadential 6 4, second inversion. For example:
Bb Bb/D (or D+) Eb Ebo7 Bb/F
Bb Bb/Ab Eb/G Ebm/Gb Bb/F
This is what you'll find really seasoned bass players outlining. Ray Brown, Ron Carter, those sorts of guys.
Both are moves to the 5 of the key.
1-3-4-#4-5
1-b7-6-b6-5
Barry Harris liked to put them both together and you have this
Bb Bb7/Ab Eb/G Gb7(#11) Bb/F
These two lines are also present in Chicago Blues, Andy Jaffe calls them blues endings. In fact they can be found in classical music too. And Motown baselines.
-
These are really cool. Descending progressions against an ascending melody. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Here's a video I did
-
Christian, link up the other three videos you do in this series. I think they’re all relevant for rhythm changes. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
cycle 4
ii-V-I
four and back
turnaround
Best videos you’ve done. I send them to students. Whoops.
-
Ok then!
Playlist link
Analysing standards progressions - YouTube
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I can explain how I do it, more or less. It isn't a structured, 100% organized and logical approach. I'm answering your question about how I think. I'm not recommending that anybody else should do this. Originally Posted by Peng1026
All of this applies to the underlying math. On the bandstand, with a tune I know, I'm more an ear player, but with awareness of chord tones to avoid clams.
I learned major scales first. I know all 12 major scales by note name without having to think about them. I know where the notes are on the fingerboard. I know the notes in the chords I use. (All of this is imperfect, but that's the idea). I know the notes in most of the scales I use.
So, when I see Bb to Bb7, I know that the difference is the A being lowered a half step to Ab. So, if I was thinking about it, I'd probably think Bb major but with the Ab. If the Bb went to an Eb7, I'd know that I'd want to lower the D to Db and I'd have a decision to make about the A vs Ab. So, in a way I'm thinking about these things in terms of major scales.
Someone else might think Bb Ionian to Mixolydian. Amounts to the same thing. To me, it sounds like learning two different scales. I prefer to think of it as the "same thing, except ...".
I don't have every scale organized in my brain. I do think, though, that D melodic minor is white keys but with a C#. And F melmin is white keys but with Bb and Ab. If I have to think about F# melmin, I'd probably think F# major but with a b3. Like that.
Are there better ways to do this? Undoubtably. If I was teaching, I'd be looking for a better approach to teach.
My approach has weaknesses. It isn't especially conducive to playing at high tempos. Better to have a vocabulary of licks you can play really fast for that purpose. It also probably makes me more of an inside player than more modern players tend to be. I don't know if that's a limitation of the approach or my ears.
If you want to hear how I play, the Showcase forum has some tracks done live at a recent gig. Look for a post called Brazilian Jazz.
-
Guys, it's RHYTHM CHANGES.
These 2 bars at the tempo you're likely playing represent less than 2 seconds of music.
It's just getting to from I to V. Are some of you really trying to outline every change? Y'all like my boy Drew in those corduroys, you'll start a fire!
-
sorry I didn't mean to hide something... Originally Posted by ragman1
I am mainly working on this version:
Bbmaj7 G7 C-7 F7 D-7 G7 C-7 F7
F-7 Bb7 Ebmaj7 Eb-7 D-7 G7 C-7 F7
Bbmaj7 G7 C-7 F7 D-7 G7 C-7 F7
F-7 Bb7 Ebmaj7 Eb-7 C-7 F7 Bbmaj7
D7 % G7 %
C7 % F7 %
Bbmaj7 G7 C-7 F7 D-7 G7 C-7 F7
F-7 Bb7 Ebmaj7 Eb-7 C-7 F7 Bbmaj7
-
Yeah, that's the trouble with asking a question around here, there are so many ways to answer, and so many ways those answers can be taken to the point of absurdity. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
When I first read the OP, I saw it as a learner asking about something in a piece he was playing that didn't fit into the scheme that he was familiar with at the time. I remember being in that place. Although I got answers to my questions at the time, some of which would take a long time to fully grok, I was glad to have insight into the ways others saw how music and how they approach form in the micro and the macro. I never took it as a mandate to obsessive play every note within.
I do think that the area the OP asks about is a pivitol one and it's not apparent to a diatonic player what's going on, in the changes or in the subtle sounds Gershwin was employing to avoid a straight turnaround.
Hearing new sounds, using them, understanding choices and choosing not to use them in the most overt way is something that I admire in players who can play the most profound understatement.
At least in the players I like to listen to, HOW one gets from the I to the V and how to get home is a study of options. Artistry is a study in essence.
I do think there's good stuff in this thread, but learning it and playing it is a far cry from a forum post.
-
Yeah that’s quite a complicated version of RC. I don’t know why people teach this but they often teach a really complicated version first up. It’s not helpful, because people think they must nail every change to play RC. Originally Posted by Peng1026
This simply isn’t true. Charlie Parker didn’t do this. Dexter Gordon didn’t. John Coltrane certainly didnt. Lester Young jammed out over the Bb - didn’t even go to Eb at all (Lester Leaps In)
RC is like the blues. It can be simple or really complex.
A basic bop RC might look like this.
Bb6 | C-7 F7 | Bb6 | C-7 F7
F-7 Bb7 | Eb7 | Bb6 | C-7 F7
If you look at the Omnibook, you’ll see the changes indicated are often like this. And any discussion of RC should take in what Parker played because he invented the way everyone does it.
You can then understand the extra passing chords in your version of the changes with respect to this very simple set of changes. Just as one would with the blues.
Anyway I address these topics in some detail in yet another video haha.
My RC vids always seem to do well so it’s clearly something a lot of people want more info about.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Oh and another one
I promise that’s the end of my video posting
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I actually saw much of your videos although sometimes I need quite a long time for each video because I'm not quite familiar with the british pronunciation (and I'm not a native English speaker). You are good at revealing the essence of the chord progressions and that's actually what I was asking in this post. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Many thanks!
-
Thanks. I got a lot from stripping things down to their bare bones and then adding complexity in. Barry Harris taught this but actually I learned it by playing early jazz and swing music where you often see much simpler versions of tunes. Originally Posted by Peng1026
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
One thing I wonder about this notion of simplifying the changes: I get that it might be useful - if not essential - for a chord-scale approach to improvisation. But, if you're approaching soloing more from an arpeggio + added notes conception, doesn't the idea of considering each chord give you more opportunities for movement, voice leading, etc etc?
-
Actually it can give you fewer. Originally Posted by CliffR
Thinking about that bird solo I posted, if you’re setting out to play Ebm7 and Ab7, with two beats to get to each, then you’re kind of bound to those chords. You’d have to play eighth notes or at the very least two or three notes on each chord to effectively outline them. If you want to add additional motion, you’re down to one beat for each chord. So the color you’re able to add in there is drastically reduced.
Bird on the other hand, plays Eb to Ebm, Eb7 straight, and Eb to Cb.
If I’m thinking Eb7 and I have to get back to Bb, then I can play Eb, and then I can go anywhere that gets me to Bb — F7, Cb7, A7, Ab7, Adim, Bbdim, Bdim. Or maybe you’re trying to get to Dm7 for the turnaround — A7, C7, Eb7, Ebm7, C#m7, C#dim, Ebdim.
Obviously you could just ignore the second chord to do some of this same stuff, but at that point, why waste your bandwidth worrying about what the second chord is in the first place?
I noticed when I started working on the blues, it’s really easy to start with the simplest version of the changes and then get to these complex strings of substitutions, but it’s quite difficult to logic your way from the complex substitutions, back to the simple form. Unless, of course, you know the simple form and how you got there in the first place
-
CliffR:
Sure, but again, RC is usually played FAST. If you try and outline every change-- particularly in a "chorded up" version like the OP posted--it quickly becomes a Giant Steps like exercise.
You can target things though, so it's still worth working on. Like in the moment, playing blues or I and V on the A section, but maybe making a point to highlight that Ebm (or Edim)
But trying to nail every ii V is going to be a recipe for some very notey playing, and likely frustration.
-
Thanks both! I appreciate you taking the time to answer
-
What an interesting coincidence Originally Posted by ragman1
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Yesterday, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions