Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Posts 151 to 200 of 259
  1. #151

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Didn't Christian address this in #148?
    He did. Sorry, didn't see it. Previous page.

    At any rate, you don't change the chords, just what you play over the top.
    That's what I meant.

    Dividing things into T vs D never gets boring!
    But what about all those rich minor sounds? I like my minor sounds! And m6s over alt doms don't actually sound very minor.

    YMMV
    Very likely :-)

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #152

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    What I meant was playing V on IV. Can you think of an example where that works, but I on IV doesn't?
    Ah, just what I was wondering...

    Try Happy Birthday with the F as a G7. Or even as a C. Lotta ****!

    But more theriously - Attya:

    Ab - Eb7 - % - Ab
    Ab - G7 - C - %

    Might work, I suppose. But I'd be highly tempted to play Em6 and Abm6 over those doms.

    But Em6 over Bbm doesn't work.... gets complicated, don't it?

  4. #153

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1


    But what about all those rich minor sounds? I like my minor sounds! And m6s over alt doms don't actually sound very minor.

    For me, m6 and m7b5 (same thing) are just rootless Dom 9, so good material for unaltered Dom class sounds. Mind you, Dom class has to be in 2 parts (at least), unaltered and altered. You can get alt sounds by superimposing m7b5 on the m3rd or b7 degree, as well as the usual other ways (MM, H/W dim, WT etc). So yeah, it's all Tonic, Dominant and Alt Dom...

    There are some great threads around that go deep. One in particular that opened with how George Benson uses T/D , a lot! ...

  5. #154

    User Info Menu

    For me, m6 and m7b5 (same thing) are just rootless Dom 9, so good material for unaltered Dom class sounds. Mind you, Dom class has to be in 2 parts (at least), unaltered and altered. You can get alt sounds by superimposing m7b5 on the m3rd or b7 degree, as well as the usual other ways (MM, H/W dim, WT etc). So yeah, it's all Tonic, Dominant and Alt Dom...
    Sure, but what about the humble m7?

  6. #155

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1

    Ab - Eb7 - % - Ab
    Ab - G7 - C - %
    ...
    Not sure I follow - are you saying that the Ab just before the G7 is an example of V7 of? IV ? (Ab7 on Dbmaj7 ?). That probably works, but what I meant was forcing V7 over (or in place of) IVmaj7 (eg - playing V7 material over the IVmaj7 chord for bar 4 in Autumn Leaves).

    Maybe I'm missing something???

  7. #156

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Sure, but what about the humble m7?
    You mean what to sub over the m7? Or what can the m7 sub for?

  8. #157

    User Info Menu

    yea... I tend to think of modern harmony as more of the control of function.... different organization of harmonic movement. The force that makes the harmony move or not. And subdominant function becoming more of a factor. I'm not getting into melodic thing... harmonic, right?

    The dominant thing.... I thinks its easy to create dominant chords... 7th chords as becoming Tonic... generally that was created by the modal development concepts.... getting your ears out of Ionianism.

  9. #158

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Sure, but what about the humble m7?
    Major in disguise just like the sus and m11 chord

  10. #159

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    For me, m6 and m7b5 (same thing) are just rootless Dom 9, so good material for unaltered Dom class sounds. Mind you, Dom class has to be in 2 parts (at least), unaltered and altered. You can get alt sounds by superimposing m7b5 on the m3rd or b7 degree, as well as the usual other ways (MM, H/W dim, WT etc). So yeah, it's all Tonic, Dominant and Alt Dom...

    There are some great threads around that go deep. One in particular that opened with how George Benson uses T/D , a lot! ...
    Altered dominant = tritone

  11. #160

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Did you?

    What was I got on?

    Help!
    Finally, a question where you didn't have a ready example to pull out in order to elucidate your answer! (I jest...) I thought it was just me, but maybe there just aren't that many tunes with a (non blues) IV chord?

  12. #161

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Not sure I follow - are you saying that the Ab just before the G7 is an example of V7 of? IV ? (Ab7 on Dbmaj7 ?). That probably works, but what I meant was forcing V7 over (or in place of) IVmaj7 (eg - playing V7 material over the IVmaj7 chord for bar 4 in Autumn Leaves).

    Maybe I'm missing something???
    I'm subbing Ab for Fm (relative minor - not allowed minors) and Eb7 for Bbm (same reason). Got to have the G7. We can have the Db, my mistake. So -

    Ab - Eb7 - % - Ab
    Db - G7 - C - %

    You're right, there's no V for IV sub. Bad example, unless we sub the Db with an Eb7. Which wouldn't be very good. Mind you, the melody note at that point is F (only F) which is the 9 of Eb7, so maybe.

    (We ought to stop messing about with perfectly good chords, really, and just play the damn tune as written!)

  13. #162

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    You mean what to sub over the m7?
    Yes, your examples were m6 or m7b5. But the answer's a major, of course.

  14. #163

    User Info Menu

    So no real examples then?

  15. #164

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    So no real examples then?
    Of what? You do understand how T/D works, right?

  16. #165

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Of what?
    'Can you think of an example where that works, but I on IV doesn't?'

    Originally, with ATTYA, I put I on IV by subbing Ab for Db but we agreed it wasn't necessary.

  17. #166

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    yea... I tend to think of modern harmony as more of the control of function.... different organization of harmonic movement. The force that makes the harmony move or not. And subdominant function becoming more of a factor. I'm not getting into melodic thing... harmonic, right?

    The dominant thing.... I thinks its easy to create dominant chords... 7th chords as becoming Tonic... generally that was created by the modal development concepts.... getting your ears out of Ionianism.
    Dominant chords are fine and all but they are a bit explicit. Sometimes that’s what you want. The melodic minor is doubly explicit as it has two tritones in it the diminished scale more so.... if you trim the explicit bits out of melodic minor, you end up with a pentatonic scale. And then you can put that major pent up a tritone on the altered chord - what I think of as the McCoy Tyner pentatonic. But that doesn’t necessarily have much to do with melodic minor....

    One thing that might be confusing is that to me a dominant is only a dominant if it has the b7th in it. So a G triad is a tonic function in the key of C. Obv not if we are talking about classical harmony but in jazz we have no problem adding G triad notes to a C chord.

    In fact the only Ionian note that absolutely will not play with the others is the 4th.

    So I divide all chords into two categories, chords with the 4th in and chords without.

    So what makes the dominant different to subdominant in this diatonic world? Well obviously that tritone dissonance, between 3rd and 7th. Our resolutions maybe somewhat softer - that B not the key of C might not move, but the tritone is still resolved to a more stable interval such as a fourth.

    Ok, so why is Fmaj7#11 stable and G7 not? Well that has a something to do with the stacking of the chord. If you support that #11 with a 3rd and 7th in a voicing its dissonance is nullified. Especially if it appears on top of the chord.

    A triad also works, which is why this 3rd inversion dominant voicing is used as a Lydian chord

    x 3 4 2 3 x

    While this one - afaik - is not

    x 3 4 4 3 x

    Anyway the upshot of this bs is that a dominant is a special case of subdominant - an activated subdominant if you like.

    Anyway not sure what that was all in aid of, but it’s how I view things really. It’s another take on T/D

    Probably Dom on subdom sounds fine, I don’t feel I’ve played around with it enough to get into the sound.

  18. #167

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Finally, a question where you didn't have a ready example to pull out in order to elucidate your answer! (I jest...) I thought it was just me, but maybe there just aren't that many tunes with a (non blues) IV chord?
    Now I’m really confused

  19. #168

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Yes, your examples were m6 or m7b5. But the answer's a major, of course.
    Not that anyone has the faintest clue what I’m blathering on about, but the difference between m7 and m6 is actually a really good way of understanding the difference between floating and resolving chords.

    Typical CST jazz pedagogy kind of gets it with the stuff about avoid notes on those chords but it kind of gets it backwards from an improvising perspective.

    These aren’t avoid notes, avoiding 6 on m7 because you give the dominant away is too passive a way of thinking. Think instead: the 6 on minor is an activation note. The b7 on minor is a chill out note. (The 7 on minor is the colour note.)

    Of course it’s no accident that we tend to think of m7 as Dorian and m6 as melodic minor.

    But Mel minor can be floating if voiced in the right way - for instance lydian augmented structures. Or Dorian #4 - where those tritones ends up somewhat blended as an upper extension, and octave displaced.

    Usually it’s hungry though. (Avoid the 6, maybe? But aug triads are old school too.) and

    But anyway, you can play jazz with those two things - m7/Dorian and m6/melodic minor. (Maybe dim7 but reg doesn’t like those haha. I don’t like it either. Luckily there’s hip options for that with no tritones...)

    Now why do you think m6 is an old fashioned sound? (It is) Maybe we don’t ever need to give dominant away/activate the subdominant.

    So: it’s interesting to me that all Jordan Klemon’s/Stephon Harris’s melodic triads on dominants avoid these tritone sounds (they do come in as quadrad tension tones, but these aren’t considered important harmonic notes in lines so much) - even when they might be conventionally regarded as having something to do with MM modes. I guess duh, they are major and minor triads.

    The modern players like to use these floating options. Something I really notice in players like Lage Lund, Kreisberg etc.

    Given Jordan and Stephon chose them based on what they liked aesthetically based on their individual *colour* I’d say that’s quite clearly the aesthetic of contemporary jazz changes playing. Everything is a colour.
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-19-2019 at 02:14 PM.

  20. #169

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Not that anyone has the faintest clue what I’m blathering on about, but the difference between m7 and m6 is actually a really good way of understanding the difference between floating and resolving chords.

    .
    I'm trying to keep up as we keep diverting, but this statement reminds me of a personal epiphany several years back where the T/D thing for me became maj6 vs Dom9, which was further reduced to m7 vs m6. This can cover all of functional harmony except alt dom, which is of course simply m6 a tritone away.

    Works for me anyway....

  21. #170

    User Info Menu

    Anyway, to carry on, this 4th degree golden rule of yours (well, everyone's really), has always intrigued me because i think there's several ways a 4th sounds ok over the tonic. Enclosing the 3rd by playing 4th on downbeat first sounds fine, ideas using a Tonic version of "family of 4" - c e g b, e g b d, g b d F, b d F a, - all sound fine to me in a certain context. Also, we agreed earlier that playing I over IV is usually fine (although not the same as playing IV over I ) ... dunno, I think peeps avoid 4 over tonic like they'll die if they dare play it. I only die when I play a maj 7th over a Dom7 in a bad way, but as you know, even there you can create a context where it not only works, but can sound kinda cool.

  22. #171

    User Info Menu

    Usually it’s hungry though. (Avoid the 6, maybe? But aug triads are old school too.) and
    Playing the m6 before the dom pre-empts the dom sound. You don't get the 7 to 3 movement, which makes the m6 a bit redundant.

    As for what you play, dorian with m7 and mel minor with m6 is good, but not necessarily. Depends. The #7 doesn't always sound right even with m6 chords. The #6 sounds very good but the #7 can grate a bit.

    I think use of the mel minor has to be considered. It's good for lyd dom and alt sounds. Apart from that, it tends to sound 'modern' but good with the right tunes. It can be used for colour.

    I did play with it over diminished chords too for a bit, despite one note being wrong. It can sound good but not always. Harmonic minor is safer although it can be a bit bland sometimes.

    Over major chords is quite interesting because it gives you the #5, #11 sound - A mel over CM7.

  23. #172

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    maj 7th over a Dom7
    Oh, I like that - FM7 over G7. Or even AbM7 over G7. That was one of Benson's favorite moves.

  24. #173

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Cool! Not only have I managed to stump you, but now I also have you confused, and all in the one thread! Serves you right for confusing the hell out of the rest of us...

    ... anyway, to carry on, this 4th degree golden rule of yours (well, everyone's really), has always intrigued me because i think there's several ways a 4th sounds ok over the tonic. Enclosing the 3rd by playing 4th on downbeat first sounds fine, ideas using a Tonic version of "family of 4" - c e g b, e g b d, g b d F, b d F a, - all sound fine to me in a certain context. Also, we agreed earlier that playing I over IV is usually fine (although not the same as playing IV over I ) ... dunno, I think peeps avoid 4 over tonic like they'll die if they dare play it. I only die when I play a maj 7th over a Dom7 in a bad way, but as you know, even there you can create a context where it not only works, but can sound kinda cool...
    Well yeah

    Just because it’s a non resolving note don’t make it a bad note. I play it all the time.

    It’s the best way of introducing harmonic motion over a static major chord. But you don’t want to land on it at the end of a phrase say. At least not unless you really hear it and you want to end on that these note. It’s like playing a dominant against tonic - it can be effective... but in general the technique that works well is to take dissonances and resolve them into target chords.

    Tbh a lot of people here seem to be working on the idea that you have to solo on the chords as written. The aebersold paradigm.

    You don’t- but you have to understand what makes waves against the tonality and how to deal with that energy.

    In a turnaround tune like rhythm changes you only have to deal with that energy in a short cycle. But with tunes where the resolutions are more stretched out like just friends, you are a little more concerned with making things touch base with the underlying chords, at least a bit.

  25. #174

    User Info Menu

    So is the discussion really about voice leading or harmony, sounds more like voice leading and voicings. Which is cool.

    Christian... the G triad over C is just a voicing... depending on the reference, simple reference can be roots.

    The 4th is also just a voicing or voice leading issue, what's implied, camouflaged or even deceptive. Your modern harmony world sounds like it's controlled by your traditional ears. Ionianism. Pretty hard to get into modern harmony using traditional guidelines.

    Prince... all you need to do to take Functional harmony into modern functional harmony... is add Modal guidelines. And then expand those modal guidelines to more pitch collections... even just using standard... Maj/ Min, Melodic Minor, Harmonic Maj and Min and the standard symmetrical scales you get Modern Harmony. And you can still use traditional functional guidelines for control of harmonic movement.... expanded Functional guidelines due to different relationships between notes and which notes have power in those relationships.

    So you can still have standard Functional control... Tonic, subdominant and Dominant with notes and intervals following different guidelines.

    I guess if you guys would just open the subdominant door of function... not just the 4th degree, you'll get into different chord progressions, which you might hear as modern. I don't know, we might have different ideas of what harmony is.

  26. #175

    User Info Menu

    all you need to do to take Functional harmony into modern functional harmony... is add Modal guidelines.
    That's what I do. Stick to the thing but mode it up a bit. Nice.

    So, over E7 - Am

    instead of A harm play F mel - A mel

    or even F#harm - A mel

    etc. Gets the water off your chest :-)


  27. #176

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Oh, I like that - FM7 over G7. Or even AbM7 over G7. That was one of Benson's favorite moves.
    I meant the maj 7 note, not the chord.

  28. #177

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    I meant the maj 7 note, not the chord.
    It works. Here you are, twice in the 1st bar :-)


  29. #178

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    So is the discussion really about voice leading or harmony, sounds more like voice leading and voicings. Which is cool.

    Christian... the G triad over C is just a voicing... depending on the reference, simple reference can be roots.

    The 4th is also just a voicing or voice leading issue, what's implied, camouflaged or even deceptive. Your modern harmony world sounds like it's controlled by your traditional ears. Ionianism. Pretty hard to get into modern harmony using traditional guidelines.
    Ionian, stop with the faux Greek, man, just call it the flippin' major scale.

    Yeah maybe... I can see that. There's a lot of stuff in my playing that's under development. But then..hmm.

    Basically I'm listening to stuff. Getting used to sounds.

    So I started off thinking like an idiot - there was functional changes playing, and then Trane and Wayne came along and lo! Chord scales. Well, it's more complicated. Even the stuff that is very CST seeming has other stuff going on... CST is kind of, well, basic.

    Most musicians these days of course have learned CST and talk about things in fairly straightforward terms, here's what I do with a melodic minor mode etc. Some guys pend a lot of time simply expressing chord scales on changes. Kurt does a lot of this, for instance.

    In general I have absolutely no problem understanding what they are talking about in masterclasses and so on, so I think have a decent grasp of the theory. it’s usually pretty straightforward, but the application is usually the hard bit.

    I don't always understand what you are talking about (I'm getting bits and pieces) so I've come to the conclusion you have your own way of looking at it...
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-20-2019 at 05:06 PM.

  30. #179

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    That would definitely help :-)
    Help what, who? Do you feel you want help? I don’t think so.

    I use this place as a sounding board for my own musings sometimes, but so does everyone else... also Prince asked me what I learned about modern harmony, so there you go. (Bet he’s sorry now.)

    It’s better to do it in playing. Then people can ask if they like what it is you do.

    It also relates to this video which may be clearer about one specific point in the above.


  31. #180

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    I'm trying to keep up as we keep diverting, but this statement reminds me of a personal epiphany several years back where the T/D thing for me became maj6 vs Dom9, which was further reduced to m7 vs m6. This can cover all of functional harmony except alt dom, which is of course simply m6 a tritone away.

    Works for me anyway....
    You’ll keep dragging it back to functional changes and Reg will keep accusing me of Ionanism, which afaik is prohibited in the book of Leviticus. I think it also leads to chafing and poor eyesight.

    But yes. That is a thing. You know who taught me that? Charlie Christian. Well Barry, too. Although he wouldn’t put it that way...

  32. #181

    User Info Menu

    LOL... the point of using Ionian is that one way of expanding harmony is using modal concepts. Part of just saying major puts you in traditional functional harmony mode or blinders, or classical whatever you would like to call . Do you have a set of groves and all the standard music theory and harmony books. I can start giving references if that would like. Part of understanding harmony is being able to use it, expand, don't just copy, actually create using the concepts, yada yada.

    The other thing most master classes are... well just that... classes for students. I'm not trying to knock your knowledge, actually I enjoy all your posts... your playing... hell your a good lookin chap, anyway, back in the late 70's I remember scoring a film, was called The Masters, martial arts and ballet, weird film, the director and producer wanted very contemporary music, so I used very modern harmony.... I used modal harmony and jazz rhythmic feels... sections had actual choices of what to play. With film you just need targets, film targets and back then you actually went in studio and recorded with reference film for sessions ... so conducted etc... not much of a budget... my point is modern harmony... generally gets away from Major, (better) because if you don't you could be the only one hearing it aw modern.... shi*** I need to head off to another gig.

    I'll check in later and try and find some old scores with modern harmony.... I also have some very modern jazz tunes... from my younger days, when I was more into to that music, as well as was the audiences.

  33. #182

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    It works. Here you are, twice in the 1st bar :-)

    Yes, well, when it comes to "anything against anything", Hubbard be the man...

  34. #183

    User Info Menu

    This thread will be 6 years old in a few weeks.

    Has harmony become even more modern since it started?

    I couldn't follow a lot of the discussion. Insufficient academic background, I guess.

    When I think of "modern" I think "Wayne Shorter, not tin pan alley". When I'm fighting my way through a Shorter tune the challenge, for me anyway, is not about which scale to play over which chord. Rather, it's how to construct a melody that suits the changes. Analysis helps, but when I see something like Dbmaj7 Ebm7 Em7 Cm7 Dm7 Bbm7 A7alt Bbm7, I only get so far.

  35. #184

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    This thread will be 6 years old in a few weeks.

    Has harmony become even more modern since it started?

    I couldn't follow a lot of the discussion. Insufficient academic background, I guess.

    When I think of "modern" I think "Wayne Shorter, not tin pan alley". When I'm fighting my way through a Shorter tune the challenge, for me anyway, is not about which scale to play over which chord. Rather, it's how to construct a melody that suits the changes. Analysis helps, but when I see something like Dbmaj7 Ebm7 Em7 Cm7 Dm7 Bbm7 A7alt Bbm7, I only get so far.
    Depends from tune to tune.

    Speak no Evil... ok I need to remind myself on that I was looking at that tune, but study the way the melody moves there. Then listen to how Wayne handles it. Get away from the chart, the bass plus the melody defines the harmony here and it’s more logical than it looks.

    I’ve also often found with Wayne that the chord charts don’t help that much and are often inaccurate in any case... as miles put it Wayne is a real composer who writes bass lines and melodies, not chord charts...

    Like I say i can’t remember what exactly it was but I remember it was interesting.

    Rule 1 of Wayne - what does Wayne do?

    He has a way of getting elegantly though his own tunes, it’s usually the best way.

    Surprisingly many of his tunes are clever shit involving the blues. He often quotes or paraphrases the melody in his solos too.

    Of course you could spaff chord scales on them. But like you say, that’s not satisfying somehow.

  36. #185

    User Info Menu

    Here’s a vid I did on deluge


  37. #186

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Depends from tune to tune.

    Speak no Evil... ok I need to remind myself on that I was looking at that tune, but study the way the melody moves there. Then listen to how Wayne handles it. Get away from the chart, the bass plus the melody defines the harmony here and it’s more logical than it looks.

    I’ve also often found with Wayne that the chord charts don’t help that much and are often inaccurate in any case... as miles put it Wayne is a real composer who writes bass lines and melodies, not chord charts...

    Like I say i can’t remember what exactly it was but I remember it was interesting.

    Rule 1 of Wayne - what does Wayne do?

    He has a way of getting elegantly though his own tunes, it’s usually the best way.

    Surprisingly many of his tunes are clever shit involving the blues. He often quotes or paraphrases the melody in his solos too.

    Of course you could spaff chord scales on them. But like you say, that’s not satisfying somehow.
    My analysis is that a lot of it is in Ab tonal center.

    When he gets to the two chords per bar section, the solos generally treat it like a 3 6 2 5. So that Em7 Cm7 Dm7 Bbm7 is played becomes, more or less, Em7 Eb6 Dm7 Db6. Then, for the Aalt Bbm7, I think Bbmelminor. What I hear on the recording is a lick and a lick a step lower, more or less.

    After that, it's a more obvious 3 6 2 5. The next chord has the root of the I in that 3 6 2 5 but it's Ebmaj7#9#11. Perhaps the kindest thing I can say about it is that it's playable on guitar. Then, we're back to Abmaj.

    So, the analysis doesn't have to go into outer space to find new theory, but you have to be flexible about the specifics of the harmony.

    As an aside, I tend not to focus on finding the exact scale where every note fits the harmony perfectly. If I'm going to be thinking that way at all, I just need to get close. I'm going to be trying to sing melody to myself anyway -- and I can adjust the truly rotten notes by a half step, on the fly.
    Last edited by rpjazzguitar; 11-25-2019 at 03:33 PM.

  38. #187

    User Info Menu

    Shorter composed with blocks of music. Takes a groove, OK bass line with implied harmony, or even with existing harmony. Usually pretty straight... then adds melody. ( or reverse, start with melody etc... ). Then expands or changes the chords, using standard BS. He camouflages the simple harmony...That's generally why when you perform his tunes... you always have a very simple approach if you choose, and can have a few harmonic and melodic ideas going on at same time... Yea... lots of blues, melodic minor and modal interchange.

    So yea... its a minor blues, or at least implied. What might have been the starting reference or tune.
    Last edited by Reg; 11-25-2019 at 12:28 PM.

  39. #188

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    My analysis is that a lot of it is in Ab tonal center.

    When he gets to the two chords per bar section, the solos generally treat it like a 3 6 2 5. So that Em7 Cm7 Dm7 Bbm7 is played becomes, more or less, Em7 Eb6 Dm7 Db6. Then, for the Aalt Bbm7, I think Bbmelminor. What I hear on the recording is a lick and a lick a step lower, more or less.

    After that, it's a more obvious 3 6 2 5. The next chord has the root of the I in that 3 6 2 6 but it's Ebmaj7#9#11. Perhaps the kindest thing I can say about it is that it's playable on guitar. Then, we're back to Abmaj. b

    So, the analysis doesn't have to go into outer space to find new theory, but you have to be flexible about the specifics of the harmony.

    As an aside, I tend not to focus on finding the exact scale where every note fits the harmony perfectly. If I'm going to be thinking that way at all, I just need to get close. I'm going to be trying to sing melody to myself anyway -- and I can adjust the truly rotten notes by a half step, on the fly.
    Yes this is true. But you are still thinking about half the music I think?

    I looked at it today...

    He gives you the path in the melody. The easiest way to play the A. A template.

    Wayne shorter has a melodic gift. I don’t actually think is a harmonic improviser at all, at least not in the same as Herbie is. He doesn’t build chords up. The harmony is emergent from the melody + bass and the reason why the chords sound connected and not random. Miles said that of him.

    Real book charts and particularly the hated iReal do a very bad job of communicating this. The chord symbols do not quite reflect what is going on.

    I’ll give it to you

    Cm7 on Cm7 Dbmaj7(#11) - C minor blues etc

    The Em7 Cm7 Dm7 Bbm7 section with the melody notes should be thought of as fully extended m11ths. With the bass and melody alone, we have.

    D/E Bb/C C/D Ab/Bb

    Or more helpfully perhaps we could also say

    D/E Dm/C C/D Cm/Bb

    Or

    D Dm C Cm triads. Leave the bass something to do. They won’t be doing anything else on this tune lol.

    The main movement is from F#-F-E-Eb. It’s a line cliche. Pretty old school when you look at it that way.

    If you preserve that line when you play over the progression it will serve to connect the chords. It’s not the only way to do it, but it’s useful base. You won’t be scrambling around. And you won’t have to play too many notes to navigate the tune.

    Now listen to the solo. What does Wayne do?
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-25-2019 at 03:35 PM.

  40. #189

    User Info Menu

    I forgot the A7b5.... that’s where you end up.

    It’s not necessary to spell out that and the Bbm11 too much, but you can have fun working that pedal tone. Herbie seems to move between thinking of that as an A altered thing and a ii v Bbm Eb7...

    From there on you can roll out more non chord tones, but it’s striking Hubbard uses a similar approach. Essentially they are paraphrasing the melodies a type of improvisation a 1920s player would have understood. I think sometimes as improvisers we feel the pressure to make up something totally new rather than working with the melodic material we have. I’m not sure where this expectation comes from...

    Which of course is not to say you can’t make up something new. But then i find the important thing on any of these tough tunes is to have something we can just play that’s nice and simple and build up from there.

    Of the solos Herbie’s is what we might think as the most chord scalic. He still makes a lot out of that feature in the melody though... the melody still in there.
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-25-2019 at 03:36 PM.

  41. #190

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I forgot the A7b5.... that’s where you end up.

    It’s not necessary to spell out that and the Bbm11 too much, but you can have fun working that pedal tone. Herbie seems to move between thinking of that as an A altered thing and a ii v Bbm Eb7...


    Of the solos Herbie’s is what we might think as the most chord scalic. He still makes a lot out of that feature in the melody though... the melody still in there.
    With regard to Em7 Cm7 Dm7 Bbm7 ...

    I hear this as a variation of a 3 6 2 5. The Cm7 takes the place of an A7 and the Bbm7 takes the place of a G7.

    It has strong structure, down two, up one, down two.

    Why does the harmony work? Because Cm7 is C Eb G Bb. If there was an A in the bass, those notes would be the b7, #9, #11 and b9.
    Same argument for the Dm7.

    This is, in effect, Em7 A7alt Dm7 G7alt, give or take a b13.

    And, when I listen to the solos, that's what I hear in the logic of their phrases.

    The part I think of as Ab tonal center might reasonably be considered C phrygian. Not quite a minor blues to my ear, but I understand what Reg meant, I think.

    A7#11 is A C# D# G.
    Bbm7 is Bb Db F Ab.

    They don't look that much alike, but A7alt comes out of Bbmelmin. I'll have to go back and listen to what they do over that change.



  42. #191

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    With regard to Em7 Cm7 Dm7 Bbm7 ...

    I hear this as a variation of a 3 6 2 5. The Cm7 takes the place of an A7 and the Bbm7 takes the place of a G7.

    It has strong structure, down two, up one, down two.

    Why does the harmony work? Because Cm7 is C Eb G Bb. If there was an A in the bass, those notes would be the b7, #9, #11 and b9.
    Same argument for the Dm7.

    This is, in effect, Em7 A7alt Dm7 G7alt, give or take a b13.

    And, when I listen to the solos, that's what I hear in the logic of their phrases.

    The part I think of as Ab tonal center might reasonably be considered C phrygian. Not quite a minor blues to my ear, but I understand what Reg meant, I think.

    A7#11 is A C# D# G.
    Bbm7 is Bb Db F Ab.

    They don't look that much alike, but A7alt comes out of Bbmelmin. I'll have to go back and listen to what they do over that change.


    Did you understand my post? I don’t know how well I explained it. I’ll do a video when I have time. It’s actually pretty simple and easy to play this tune when you grasp this triadic background.

    Often with fast non functional changes players take a simple route through it and then stretch on the more modal sections on Cm/Db and A7b5 Bbm7.... (Herbie treats the Cm as an open vamp and goes out on it later in his solo. He makes the most of the Cm Db change of the soloists. I think he simplifies the vamp at the end a little?

    your 3 6 2 5 thing sort of works theoretically, id need to try it to see if my bop lines would work there....

    An analogous situation is Song for Bilbao from Tales of the Hudson. Nobody would say that these players aren’t some of the best of the era, but they all circumvent the difficulty by employing a strategy. Quoting the melody, playing the chords and playing variations on the melody are all perfectly reasonable ways to do it. Any changes playing should probably be heavily focused on the simplest chord tones. Think Giant Steps.

    Rick seemed to think it had something do with them being major chords iirc, but tbh I often hear
    these kinds of strategies on fast hard changes.



    Stablemates is another one....
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-25-2019 at 07:57 PM.

  43. #192

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Did you understand my post? I don’t know how well I explained it. I’ll do a video when I have time. It’s actually pretty simple and easy to play this tune.
    I may have understood it. I played through it with the chords you suggested. Sounded good. Still sounds like a 3 6 2 5.

    In this view, for better or worse, you appreciate in some inchoate way that it's a 3 6 2 5 and use the usual techniques for navigating a 3 6 2 5. If you nail the Em7 and the Dm7, whatever melody you come up with is probably going to work. It may sound inside-outside-inside-outside, depending on what you come up with. If you choose to think of the second chord as A7alt (played over Cm7) you're probably going to hit some of the chord tones of Cm7 anyway C Eb G Bb vs A C# Eb F G Ab Bb C. And, that's what I thought I was hearing on the recording.

    This short passage can be analyzed different ways. Which is preferable depends, I should think, a great deal on the player's overall approach to soloing.

  44. #193

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    I may have understood it. I played through it with the chords you suggested. Sounded good. Still sounds like a 3 6 2 5.

    In this view, for better or worse, you appreciate in some inchoate way that it's a 3 6 2 5 and use the usual techniques for navigating a 3 6 2 5. If you nail the Em7 and the Dm7, whatever melody you come up with is probably going to work. It may sound inside-outside-inside-outside, depending on what you come up with. If you choose to think of the second chord as A7alt (played over Cm7) you're probably going to hit some of the chord tones of Cm7 anyway C Eb G Bb vs A C# Eb F G Ab Bb C. And, that's what I thought I was hearing on the recording.

    This short passage can be analyzed different ways. Which is preferable depends, I should think, a great deal on the player's overall approach to soloing.
    Does this approach help you solo on the tune? I’m unlikely to pick up a guitar today so I can’t try it for myself unfortunately. My feeling is that it would sound cool but might not cut to the core of that progression. Em9 A7b13 Dm9 G7b13 is better voice leading in this context.

    Theoretically I can see that the Wayne progression would make a nice sub for a turnaround. I would tend to see it more as Bm7 E7susb9 Am7 D7susb9

    Minor over dominant is a common sub for altered dominant though. Your thing would probably work. I’d need to try it, but tbh most things work if they are logical and resolve. Relating it to something familiar might help in the short term but might not help with the Wayne tunes that diverge further from functional tonality.

    Again I think my approach (or rather Jordan/Stephon Harris’s) really cuts through the bullshit.

    You can come up with systems that define 7 or more notes over each chord, but in practice this can be very clunky to use. It’s too much information all at once.

    It’s striking that the players on the recording really don’t make a meal of it. Another way of putting it is it’s interesting to me what they leave out of each cst pitch set. I mean in one sense it’s Dorian over each m7. Urgh.

    Very rarely am I in the position of wanting to deal with more that three or four notes over each chord in a fast non functional changes like this. ‘Probably’ hitting chord tones is not what I want, especially of course in a trio. I want to be able to outline the progression clearly and without fuss bearing in mind each chord sticks around for no more than 4 beats. And above all I want to play something rhythmically compelling and melodic. When I am comping I want clear voice leading.

    And as with say, Coltrane changes. Unlike a typical Tin Pan Alley standard where we can reharm and so on, the harmonic interest is kind of baked into the tune. Therefore it is not up to the soloist to create harmonic interest and it’s more important to play melodically and rhythmically to make these unusual fast written changes sound good. The ears need something to hang onto. All my transcriptions so far seem to bear this out.

    It makes sense right, Wayne is not as familiar as Blue Moon.... we don’t need to run variations on something unfamiliar. Well maybe for other jazz geeks.

    That’s an inverse approach. Trane started this right? So for instance we would use a Coltrane sub on a ii v I but the opposite can sound sort of ok, but doesn’t get to the heart of it.

    1 2 3 5 is often the approach used for Trane changes. Again in the Beato vid it’s notable how simple and how organised the examples sound. It’s just chord tones 90% of the time.

    *However* - in this case the melody is on the extensions not on the base triads as it is in Giant Steps and Bilbao. And these US melody notes are the ones they go for.

    So, I think everything you say is true, but I don’t think it gets to the essential economy of how the horn players solo on this tune. A lot of the creativity is in the rhythmic variations. Again if you spend any time at all listening to jazz from the pre war era this approach will be familiar. Think Johnny Hodges (Trane’s favourite)

    I’ll dig a little more into the exact note choices that the guys play on this progression but I take it you can hear the tunes melody over each of those sections in the solos?

    Anyway, I bring it up because it shows how modern harmony is not just one unified approach in a book. This way of thinking may not work for everything. (Although in my experience melodic triads are a very versatile and powerful tool that allow you to play basically any type of harmonic music.) I think to go, harmony until 1960 then modal/cst to the present day is a necessary simplification to teach basic ‘getting though the gig skills’ to 19 year olds.

    But I think ‘it’s the melody stupid’ is a great practical skill for young musicians that always works and requires no flipping pseudo Greek. Of course it requires you to actually know the tune and not be reading off your phone.

    Let’s do another Wayne tune!
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-26-2019 at 05:47 AM.

  45. #194

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Let’s do another Wayne tune!
    By all means. I need the practice on those tunes.

    What I thought I heard was navigation through 3 6 2 5 with melodic devices. I didn't try to figure out the notes. The thought about chord tones on the Em7 and Dm7 and random **** in between was my idea. Joking about random. Rather, any melodic idea that is anchored in the chord tones and maybe consonant extensions of the Em7 and Dm7. At least, that's what occurs to me while I'm typing this. I don't know if that's how I'd approach the tune in a band context.

    If something like that was slow enough, I'd figure I could nail each chord, if I had to, meaning I'd try to make up a melody out of chord tones and additional notes picked by ear.

    If the tune was really fast, I'd be looking for shortcuts. First thing I might try is playing the entire thing in Cmaj. Usually, that's a joke, but in this case it might actually work. Might not want to lean on E against Cm7, or D against Bbm7 but at a fast enough tempo it might work.

    It may be that a high-moderate tempo would be hardest. Too fast to make nailing each chord comfortably but slow enough that clams will be heard.

    How about Ana Maria?

  46. #195

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    By all means. I need the practice on those tunes.

    What I thought I heard was navigation through 3 6 2 5 with melodic devices. I didn't try to figure out the notes. The thought about chord tones on the Em7 and Dm7 and random **** in between was my idea. Joking about random. Rather, any melodic idea that is anchored in the chord tones and maybe consonant extensions of the Em7 and Dm7. At least, that's what occurs to me while I'm typing this. I don't know if that's how I'd approach the tune in a band context.

    If something like that was slow enough, I'd figure I could nail each chord, if I had to, meaning I'd try to make up a melody out of chord tones and additional notes picked by ear.

    If the tune was really fast, I'd be looking for shortcuts. First thing I might try is playing the entire thing in Cmaj. Usually, that's a joke, but in this case it might actually work. Might not want to lean on E against Cm7, or D against Bbm7 but at a fast enough tempo it might work.

    It may be that a high-moderate tempo would be hardest. Too fast to make nailing each chord comfortably but slow enough that clams will be heard.

    How about Ana Maria?
    Just playing Em7 and Dm7 might be necessary if in a duo. I think sus chords would be better though, slash chord voicings, like the ones I wrote above .

    C blues would work pretty well if you were using your ears.

    You know horns are hustlers and guitars (and pianos) are geeks. They play poker while we think it’s chess.... As a long serving nerd I find the hustling mentality more interesting and mysterious....

    OK Wayne’s a total nerd. But you get the idea?

    Ana Maria. Ok I don’t know that one, so will have to wait a couple of days. But I’m up for it!
    Last edited by christianm77; 11-26-2019 at 06:05 AM.

  47. #196

    User Info Menu

    Here’s a thing I did about Beatrice but didn’t publish


  48. #197

    User Info Menu

    Also if it helps, my terms

    Cm11 = chord up
    C Dorian = scale, 13 is avoid note
    Bb on Cm7 = top down (melody down)

    Three ways of thinking about the same cst pitch set. The difference is emphasis.

    The former relates to chord symbols, bass and basic voicings obviously... but we can get stuck down there as improvisers. But we all
    have to learn it.

    The middle often leads to sophomore noodling, but with sufficiently developed patterns, language and intervalloc approaches can be made to sound good.

    The latter relates to both what I think of as traditional chord subs and more advanced harmony so on and to me is more directly useful as a melodic improviser.

  49. #198

    User Info Menu

    Maybe ESP... here's a vid I made for JGF 10 years ago... funny to hear old BS. I'm pretty sure I just made a quick backing track... Hip Hop... probable from playing a gig the night before. Anyway... I rarely rehearse for vids.... just make as quick as I can. On edge, loose, train wreck at any moment kind of thing. keep improve simple... repeat melodic material and create shapes with form.

    His tunes do open the modal and pentatonic doors... I'm In for all WS tunes...

  50. #199

    User Info Menu

    Here's why Ethan Iverson thinks 1964 was an important year for Modern Jazz:

    A Look Back at 1964, a Pivotal Year in the Career of the Jazz Composer Wayne Shorter | The New Yorker

  51. #200

    User Info Menu

    A list of Shorter Tunes... that I cover, or at least have transcribed and arranged


    Black Nile... with Lee Morgan 1964 Still played to much
    Wild Flower... with freddie, Still play this tune, arranged a big band version... just to moody
    Iris... with Miles 1965, fun ballad....
    Prince of Darkness.... usually play as up swing, burnin, great solo tune
    El Gaucho.... still fun tune, started playin back in late 60's
    Lester Left Town.... cool arranged tune, don't play that much anymore
    Maria Antoinette and Angola.... still fun, old school
    Speak no Evil
    Yes and No and
    Night Dreamer...cool 3/4
    the later stuff like,
    The Three Maria's were fun back in the 80's... those days are gone cool at bigger venues


    His tunes aren't that complicated... really, play them in real time. When you get past "expanding" functional harmony, with modal subs and think of many of his chord progressions as "Chord Patterns". Maybe... like a Pedal with chords.... Chord patterns become basically One functional reference.... Go through 15 or 20 of his tunes and you'll start to see and hear his most used chord patterns... or moving chords over a pedal.

    We could play and make analysis of Ana Maria.... it's just such a slow moving somewhat moody tune... the use of a Bossa is almost an oxymoron... play the melody forever, but why not. Spending a lot of time on one tune... misses a lot of what playing Shorter tunes is... (personal op). Modern harmony ... if you struggle getting through Shorter tunes, which are still pretty functional... expanded functional.... Maybe take a simple tune and make it harmonically modern.... even a simple Monk tune, Well You Needn't.... and try and use modern harmonic concepts.... or maybe some of Shorter's harmonic tricks of camouflaging function. Something to think about over the American excuse to take a holiday. (don't look at the real story).