Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Posts 251 to 268 of 268
  1. #251

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by joelf
    Then there's this: 2 diminished 7th chords played a 4th apart. Jazzers use it as a 5 chord. It came from classical composers, who had an entirely different usage in mind.

    Don't ask me what it was, though (LOL). I ain't no egghead...
    if I'm not mistaken, it gives a diminished scale whole tone-semi tone with as tonic that of the first chord. We get the same thing with two diminished 7 chords to an interval of one tone, exp Cdim7-Ddim7, instead of Cdim7-Fdim7 (4th). I find it easier to explain it like this. As complete chords of 8 notes, it's quite complicated to name, minor chord (b3) with 7 & 9, and the choice of b5th or #5th, a 4th and a #11th, a 6th > 13th, or to name them otherwise

    Classical composers have done it, melodically, much the same as jazzmen. Am I wrong? It is explained (Wikipedia) that the 10th Sonata of Scriabin begins with an augmented scale followed by a diminished scale. 1913, it was before Messiaen

    I've changed, I find it more enjoyable than Horowitz ;-)
    Last edited by Patlotch; 02-15-2020 at 10:55 AM.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #252

    User Info Menu

    Also I remember this book

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Twentieth-C...5398/ref=nodl_

    the idea of Modern Harmony in jazz really relates to the idea of jazz being this hermetically sealed history in which we envisage, as Conrad Cork put it, ‘Harmony as the Engine’ of development, in which modern jazz has more progressive harmony than the old and that the main thing to look at. Cork, as well as people like Wynton Marsalis reject this....

    the reality is more complicated. This move exists to some extent, but early jazz musicians were contemporaries with Debussy, Ravel and Schoenberg... and checked out their music.

    I mean as a random example, I was listening to this the other day - check out the piano break before the (incredibly hip) verse after the chorus
    : also check out the end chord...

    subtle touches and not in a Mist or dance of the octopus by Red Norvo (a very odd record) but the music of this era is full of these touches that suggest a much wider palette of sounds beyond the standard changes of the time. Didn’t often end up in tunes themselves of course. Or in most pub Dixieland band covers of these songs.

    But yeah, it was true that post-Louis pre-60s jazz was much more adventurous music layered on top of the harmonically formulaic but highly melodic popular tunes of the day. Louis playing all the notes on those vanilla chords. Original tunes sometimes gave more of a idea of where future compositions might go, when the harmony of the compositions themselves might be emancipated from these pop norms. As Monk’s teacher had it:


  4. #253

    User Info Menu

    hey Christian... back on Inner.. Is that maj7#9#11 with nat. or flat 13th.... just curious. That Har. Min. and Maj or MM thing.

    yea, Joe... it's always been application.

    Hey Pat... yea loved Scriabin's later works, and his last, op74, the Etudes, really opened my ears back in the stone ages. Anyone who gets into metaphysics must have had different views about music.

    I tend to use Subdominant types of function when hearing and performing Jazz. That whole Dominant / Tonic approach just doesn't cover much of jazz performance. Great when verbalizing and horizontal analysis... but, well that in it's self can become modern harmony. (probably not, but good for discussion).

  5. #254

    User Info Menu

    What I most like these days are not-quite-chords where there's no 3rd or 7th and you can put in your own or leave 'em out. Like power chords or a chord like C2. I think I copped this from Tom Harrell, but he's hardly the 1st to have used this in jazz. A favorite vamp that I use on Gentle Rain in A min and my own tune Perk up in F is (in A Minor) C2/A Bb2/A (A and E bass 1st 2 beats, then those 2 chords with pedal (from bottom: GCD/A FBbC/A) on three and the and of four, carrying into the next measure tied to a whole note w/crescendo. It really gives a lift off to the solos.

    Funny thing: they're so simple and useful in so many situation b/c of the open sound. And they sound great on guitar in the lower positions w/open strings. They're also nice for contrast when you have more complex changes in the rest of the tune, like chiaroscuro. And the open sound draws the listener in---an unconscious sense of expectation for harmony to fill in more---at least the way I hear it. Then when you do state it fully---add the missing intervals---boom, climax !

  6. #255

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    hey Christian... back on Inner.. Is that maj7#9#11 with nat. or flat 13th.... just curious. That Har. Min. and Maj or MM thing.
    I like 13... b13 and #9 sounds like movement, not colour, to me.

  7. #256

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by joelf
    What I most like these days are not-quite-chords where there's no 3rd or 7th and you can put in your own or leave 'em out. Like power chords or a chord like C2. I think I copped this from Tom Harrell, but he's hardly the 1st to have used this in jazz. A favorite vamp that I use on Gentle Rain in A min and my own tune Perk up in F is (in A Minor) C2/A Bb2/A (A and E bass 1st 2 beats, then those 2 chords with pedal (from bottom: GCD/A FBbC/A) on three and the and of four, carrying into the next measure tied to a whole note w/crescendo. It really gives a lift off to the solos.

    Funny thing: they're so simple and useful in so many situation b/c of the open sound. And they sound great on guitar in the lower positions w/open strings. They're also nice for contrast when you have more complex changes in the rest of the tune, like chiaroscuro. And the open sound draws the listener in---an unconscious sense of expectation for harmony to fill in more---at least the way I hear it. Then when you do state it fully---add the missing intervals---boom, climax !
    I like that too.

    I'm getting more comfortable with leaving at least one of the guide tones out of things. Guide tones are kinda lame, are they not? I think you have to learn them but then if you use them all the time you sound like jazz school. Over-explaining the changes.

    I think leaving the 3rd out of the dominant is basically the best way to sound a little modern ... although Lester was doing that back in the 30s of course... softening the perfect cadence. And then there's Wes. However things like Gm7 or Eb/G used as a sub for G7 have that very 'I'm too cool for jazz school' feel.

    Also this type of thing
    5 x 5 x 7 x - which Peter Bernstein described as a Monk voicing
    5 x 5 4 7 x A13b9 (no 3rd)

    I like using maj7sus2 (or a triad a fifth higher over the root like G/C for Cmaj7) which is a bit prog, but you can use for minor, so hey.

  8. #257

    User Info Menu

    Guide tones aren't lame to me, maybe over-done. They're good when there's just 2 melody instruments and no chord instrument...

  9. #258

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by joelf
    Guide tones aren't lame to me, maybe over-done. They're good when there's just 2 melody instruments and no chord instrument...
    That might be a better way of putting it haha. On the other hand, roots are good. Nothing wrong with a good root. Somebody's got to play it, and despite jazz educations weird attitude towards them, often more than one person.

    Roots are cool. Guide tones are OK I guess

  10. #259

    User Info Menu






  11. #260

    User Info Menu

    Just a reaction to OP from the perspective of a forum schmuck with a guitar.

    I don’t generally listen much to the kind of “jazz standards” that forum guitarists supposedly are fixated on. To me most of that stuff sounds like old movies. The jazz I like is Kind of Blue and forward all the way to Wayne Krantz, EST or whoever plays stuff that sounds fresh.

    But when I tried to get into playing jazz, it is almost impossible to find learning resources on that kind of material. 99.99 percent is about jazz standards and 251s. And jam sessions around here are about that as well. I stopped going to local live jazz events because it all sounds the same. Unfortunately I don’t live in NYC.

  12. #261

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by frankhond
    Just a reaction to OP from the perspective of a forum schmuck with a guitar.

    I don’t generally listen much to the kind of “jazz standards” that forum guitarists supposedly are fixated on. To me most of that stuff sounds like old movies. The jazz I like is Kind of Blue and forward all the way to Wayne Krantz, EST or whoever plays stuff that sounds fresh.

    But when I tried to get into playing jazz, it is almost impossible to find learning resources on that kind of material. 99.99 percent is about jazz standards and 251s. And jam sessions around here are about that as well. I stopped going to local live jazz events because it all sounds the same. Unfortunately I don’t live in NYC.
    All the guys in NYC seem to know zillions of standards.

    I think that in jazz education esp. in the states the route for most modern/contemporary players has been ‘get really good at playing bebop by age 18’ followed by ‘spend the rest of your life avoiding bebop’ Dave Douglas was an insane bop trumpeter as a teenager, for example.

    Bop is at least as much about rhythm, idiom, language and phrasing as it is about harmony though. Contemporary jazz still bases its flow and phrasing in the conventions of Charlie Parker, even where the harmony is totally different. So that’s probably a bit chicken and egg.

    So, do you have to do things that way? I don’t know really, but what I would say is it’s important to have a repertoire. If you want to play with jazz musicians that will be standards of some type. However if your thing is post modal jazz, learn that repertoire. Hopefully you can find some like minded fellows, and eventually move towards composing etc.

    Actually there’s loads of material on how that harmony works; that’s the main focus of Mark Levine’s books for example. TBH Krantz is a lot of E dorian tbh haha (I know that’s a simplification, but it’s also kinda true.) Anyway Wayne has written a book on improvisation so you might want to check that.

  13. #262

    User Info Menu

    TBH Krantz is a lot of E dorian tbh haha
    You may well be right, and Krantz is one of few who makes versions of pop/rock for example NIN. Might be a correlation there.

    Mark Giuliana has a great live set on YouTube where he covers Autechre… why jazz up Bob Dylan when you can do something much more interesting. The future jazz standards may not be what we would expect.

  14. #263

    User Info Menu

    There are a few short Wayne Krantz lessons on youtube, they give an interesting insight into his approach, such as this one:


  15. #264

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by frankhond
    Just a reaction to OP from the perspective of a forum schmuck with a guitar.

    I don’t generally listen much to the kind of “jazz standards” that forum guitarists supposedly are fixated on. To me most of that stuff sounds like old movies. The jazz I like is Kind of Blue and forward all the way to Wayne Krantz, EST or whoever plays stuff that sounds fresh.

    But when I tried to get into playing jazz, it is almost impossible to find learning resources on that kind of material. 99.99 percent is about jazz standards and 251s. And jam sessions around here are about that as well. I stopped going to local live jazz events because it all sounds the same. Unfortunately I don’t live in NYC.
    Yep, Kind of Blue forward. They call it post-bop. But look at how old that is, 1959. Fusion is old now too, 1969.

    So, standards? Most people like to hear a melody and recognize a form without listening too hard. I'm not sure who likes all that modal jamming anyway, the players or the audience?

    A lot of "modern" guys seem to play standards in a cloaked kind of way. If you don't hear the head you might not ever guess the tune. I don't mind all that if the soloing is compelling enough, but I'll also say that I'm not getting the idea they're expanding their audience with that approach.

  16. #265

    User Info Menu

    Mind blowing fact (for me)

    when was Bitches Brew released? 1970?

    51 years

    51 years before Bitches Brew was 1919. That’s basically pre-Louis Armstrong…
    Last edited by Christian Miller; 06-27-2021 at 02:17 PM.

  17. #266

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by frankhond
    You may well be right, and Krantz is one of few who makes versions of pop/rock for example NIN. Might be a correlation there.

    Mark Giuliana has a great live set on YouTube where he covers Autechre… why jazz up Bob Dylan when you can do something much more interesting. The future jazz standards may not be what we would expect.
    Well one obvious aspect of that is the focus becomes less on the harmony; even modal harmony, and more on textural elements. Guiliana of course being a drummer and a highly imaginative one at that is really attuned to that side of things, and that brings us to the Donny McCaslin Quartet, at least before they became indie rock.



    Krantz himself isn’t really a single note player any more. At least the couple of times I’ve heard him; highly rhythmic and textural. TBH he sounds more like Thurston Moore or Lee Renaldo to me than any ‘jazz guitarist’, apart from I suppose his super conceptualised approach to time.

    So literally no idea whether you need to conversant in bop or even post-bop to play this stuff. Maybe you can start here.

  18. #267

    User Info Menu

    So I haven't read all 7 pages worth of comments , so forgive me if I'm being redundant.
    It's really great to explore new harmony and languages of music,and I applaud those who do. But at the end of the day, it's about communicating musical language. And I think if you're able to make it part of your language, great!

    On the other hand, just like simple Blues forms, nothing worse than people playing without feel! No matter how hard or complex, at the end of the day it's all about the emotion it conveys.
    And that's why we all appreciate Joe Zawinul, Coltrane, McGlaughlins, Chick Corea's compositions as much as Ray Charles , James Brown and Muddy Waters.

  19. #268

    User Info Menu

    This Ron Miller?
    Kind of a weird video - like reading a video book in silence, but whenever a scored example is encountered a piano is heard playing it. First example of that is at 1:20...