You Don't Know What Love Is

[eladb6]

Hey, I have just learned this tune and I have little problem.
Those are the chords:
||F-7 |Db9 C7b9|F-7 C7b9|Db7 |G-7b5 C7b9|F-6 Ab7|Db7 |G-7b5 C7b9||
(This is just the first A)
I have 2 questions about it:
1) I don't really understand what scale I should play over the Db7, is it just chromatic to the C7?
2) The same question about the Ab7, what scale should I play over it? I think it is Db7's dominant, but I'm not sure.

[ksjazzguitar]

As is my rule of thumb for dominant chords and scales:

Dominant chord resolving down a 5th to a major:
Mixolydian is the diatonic scale, but altered sounds cool. The HW diminished sounds good too, giving a 13b9 sound. The whole tone scale can be nice too, giving a 9#5 (or 9b5) sound.

Dominant chord resolving down a 5th to a minor:
Spanish phrygian (5th mode Harm Min) is the diatonic scale, but altered sounds cool.

Any other dominant chord:
Lydian dominant.

The Db7 falls into the last category, so you will want the Db lydian dominant, Db Eb F G Ab Bb Cb, the same notes as the Ab Mel Min.

Another way to arrive at the same answer would be to start with your Fm scale (F G Ab Bb C Db Eb, your "home" key) and just alter the notes that conflict with the chord, i.e. change the C to Cb.

The Ab falls into the first category, so I hear it mainly as Ab mixolydian, but might alter it.

Peace,
Kevin

[bkdavidson]

It's kind of a minor blues. It doesn't follow a 'blues' form at all, but you'll see that. All these chords are diatonic to F minor, even if the Db7 contains a Cb and the Ab7 contains a Gb. A jazz listener will just hear a bunch of F minor, which is how I'd play over it. If you try to nail each individual chord in something this diatonic and with the chords changing every two beats as often as it does, you run the risk of sounding really choppy.

[Reg]

One of my favorite ballads... as bkdavidson mentioned... very blusey... Jazz blues. The better or more advanced your techniques... the more you can say over this tune. I add a ton of chords and re-harm. very blue.... Depends on players etc... I'll call this tune at my next jazz jam which is broadcast live on the net, next one is Dec. 20th, 7pm-10pm pacific coast time. I'll post more info. when gets closer... I'll make video of tune with samples of changes and how they work with melody and soloing approaches... Best Reg

[ksjazzguitar]

...All these chords are diatonic to F minor, even if the Db7 contains a Cb and the Ab7 contains a Gb.

Sorry, but I think that we have a disagreement about what the word "diatonic" means. The Db7 and Ab7 chords cannot be constructed from the Fm scale (or its Harm Min or Mel Min inflections), therefore they are not diatonic to Fm, by definition.

A jazz listener will just hear a bunch of F minor, which is how I'd play over it.

I agree with the first clause. Yes, you hear it as Fm (the A section of course) because the non-diatonic chords are just temporary alterations and not modulations. But if you just smear an Fm scale over it without adjusting for non-diatonic chord tones, it doesn't sound like jazz to me - it sounds like a rock guitar player that doesn't really know how chords work. I would agree that you can throw some Fm blues scale in there, especially over the iim7b5-V7-i. The blue note even gives you the Cb for the Db7, but you have to be careful with the C.

The tune doesn't move too fast, so they aren't hard to catch. (It's usually played as a ballad, but I like doing it with a double time swing feel or even a bossa.) I'm not saying you have to play a Cb over every Db7 and a Gb over every Ab7, but if you keep playing unresolved Cs and Gs over those, you won't sound like you know what you're doing to educated ears. If you can't hear the problem with playing unresolved Maj7s over dominant 7th chords, then you might as well just ignore what I'm saying. (I've had this debate in this forum before and it seems you either "get it" or you don't - another reason why I need to write my book.)

These mistakes are (IMHO) an unfortunate symptom of the "key center" approach to improv. The approach is essentially reductionist and a simplification - instead of thinking of each chord and it's chord tones, you are grouping chords together and playing one scale over all of them. That is fine up to that point, but sometimes people are tempted to take reductionism and simplification too far and start interpolating the wrong scale over chords over which it does not belong. Again, not a condemnation of the scaler approach in its entirety, just be careful not to over-simplify.

I would never advise "just play Fm over the whole thing" unless it was a terrified absolute beginner. But then I wouldn't have them playing this song, but something that does not require scaler alterations. Again, if you just change the notes (C->Cb and G->Gb) you get the scales I recommend - not a coincidence.

Peace,
Kevin

[Reg]

Hey kevin ...technically your correct yada yada... I'm not close to being a beginner...but I'm alright with using diatonic being used with implication of blues... diatonic to blues or harmonies with blue note control system, in the since of different modal systems have different controlling notes, intervals, resolutions and different functions of the tri-tone etc...
I'm also alright with many other non-jazz usages when expressing opinions about jazz... There is a very sophisticated method of playing jazz/blues which uses very simply... tension / release, dominant / tonic, type of organizational method of constructing solos which almost keeps a blue pedal implied while choosing your pitch collections. Most blues players simply use their ears and trial and error as learning technique and generally pull from pentatonic or magic notes... as opposed to jazz players. Jazz players tend to use modal interchange to get new pitch collections or harmonic areas and impose the traditional blue note harmony which creates a duel source control methodology... some play better than others... When I play I'm aware of all approaches but still play by ear... and as always ...context tends to be a controlling factor, which is a reflection of musicians involved... I tend to agree with most on this forum ... "you be the man"... but jazz players are relaxed, were not that formal... we have a certain comfort in not knowing where things may go, musically of course. Best Reg

[ksjazzguitar]

I'm not saying it's not possible to play over the whole thing with an Fm scale, I'm just saying it's not jazz. Yes, you can throw a blues scale in there from time to time (I certainly do) but if that's all you do, then it sounds like a blues player pretending to play jazz. And any listener with an educated ear is going to cringe at all those unresolved Cs and Gs over the Db7 and Ab7. I've hear guys play it this way (usually rock players trying to play a "jazzy" tune.) It's like the party bands that I've seen playing "Ipanema" and just soloing in F for the A section - it fools the rock fans but not the jazz cats.

I've heard "You Don't Know What Love Is" many, many times. I've never heard a pro just wash over the A section with one scale. True, they may miss a Cb or a Gb here or there, but they hit it enough to make it clear that they know what is going on harmonically. Even the scalar approach won't let you do that, let alone the more harmonic approach I advocate.

The reason rock players can get away with smearing a scale over the changes is that they tend to treat changes as modal vamps instead of functional harmony (OK, I'm generalizing here.) But that tends not to be how jazz guys approach harmony, especially once non-diatonic harmonies are introduced. Blues kind of let's you get away with it too, so some of that transfers to the jazz language. But it doesn't supersede the jazz language, it just adds a little bit of flavor.

Again, if that sounds good to you, go for it. But don't be surprised if some of the more experienced cats start to cringe.

Peace,
Kevin

[P4guitar]

This is a slight tangent to the discussion so apologies up front.

Does anyone approach this tune like I do, that is playing each chord of the moment, i.e. having a few scales that fit the chords and then playing the scale that's most appropriate to the harmonic movement? This is what bkdavidson said would result in choppy lines but I disagree.

Anyway in other discussions on the net I've heard this approach described as vertical playing which describes what I do. I think Kevin is somewhat in this camp while if I understand him correctly, Reg is more open to laying a blues scale over changes and editing it on the fly to fit the moment.

What say you?

[Reg]

Hey Kevin ... I am one of the more experienced cats... I'm not sure your understanding what I'm implying... since you appear to think I pushing for playing Fmin over the whole thing... maybe were talking about different tune or I failed to make clear one of my approaches to soloing over YDKWLI clear. As far as resolutions... what constitutes the resolution... are there time limits, does implication of, or deceptive resolution cover, sorry... I'm having fun... How dig you get Fmin, from...
"jazz/blues which uses very simply... tension / release, dominant / tonic, type of organizational method of constructing solos which almost keeps a blue pedal implied while choosing your pitch collections. Jazz players tend to use modal interchange to get new pitch collections or harmonic areas and impose the traditional blue note harmony which creates a duel source control methodology... Fmin?
" Here's changes I use for A section... These imply harmonic areas and I usually play voiced lead lines as I hear, they change...context thing. I like a db.x feel at mm52

//F-9, Bb9#11 // Db9sus , C7b13 // F-9, / G-7b5 C7b9 // Db13sus / / Db13 //
Bb13sus / G-7b5 C7#9 // F-9 Bb13sus Ab13sus // Db9sus / / Db9 // G-7b5 C7#9 //

The changes somewhat reflect harmonic sources of which I impose Blues harmony on top for my control methodology for soloing... hardly F min. but when I tell a rhythm section I'm going to play blues version of YDKWLI, most understand and will cover...
And obviously we don't go through this long verbal process... I have early gig tonight, when I get back I"ll video example... I dig tune... don't play very often... Best Reg

[swansd]

I have a question about something Kevin said:

Any other dominant chord:
Lydian dominant.

Where the dominant chord doesn't resolve down a 5th to a major, why do you recommend Lydian dominant, as opposed to mixolydian? In the example on the Db7, why play a G and not a Gb? Also, can you explain further about why the Ab melodic minor scale works over the Db7? (I like the way your suggestion sounds by the way)

Thanks for your reply.

[P4guitar]

I have a question about something Kevin said:

Any other dominant chord:
Lydian dominant.

Where the dominant chord doesn't resolve down a 5th to a major, why do you recommend Lydian dominant, as opposed to mixolydian? In the example on the Db7, why play a G and not a Gb? Also, can you explain further about why the Ab melodic minor scale works over the Db7? (I like the way your suggestion sounds by the way)

Thanks for your reply.

I'll take a stab. The scale he's talking about for Db7 has a raised fourth (flat 5) in it. It a tri-tone for G7 which also resolves to C. It's a common way to move into a dominant a half step below (Db7 to C7).

Play it yourself and see/hear what sounds better.

[JohnW400]

I have a question about something Kevin said:

Any other dominant chord:
Lydian dominant.

Where the dominant chord doesn't resolve down a 5th to a major, why do you recommend Lydian dominant, as opposed to mixolydian? In the example on the Db7, why play a G and not a Gb? Also, can you explain further about why the Ab melodic minor scale works over the Db7? (I like the way your suggestion sounds by the way)

Thanks for your reply.

Another way to look at it is Fmi is the relative minor of Ab major. In Ab major the Db is a major seventh chord. (IV ma7) However in the Ab melodic minor scale the Db is a dominant 7th. (IV7). Since Db is the 4th degree you would use the 4th mode of Ab melodic minor, Hence - Db Lydian Dominant.

One thing I like to do on this tune is play Gb9 instead of C7, and use the Gb lyd. dominant and then to F melodic minor.


One of my favortie tunes. I play it on most gigs.

Reg, I'm looking forward to your video on this tune. Those subs you list look interesting

[ksjazzguitar]

Reg sorry if I misunderstood what you said. No offense, but I have a hard time following what you write - so many ellipses, sentence fragments, and phrases like "blue note control system," "blue pedal," "voiced lead lines," and "duel source control methodology" are one that I have not encountered in my studies - and I'm sure that I'm a poorer man because of it.

I misunderstood you to be defending the "play the Fm scale over everything and throw in some blues" notes approach (which surprised me.) After carefully reading your response it seems that we are more in sync than I'd mistakenly believed. I apologize for the misunderstanding. And ultimately, if you weren't defending the "play the Fm scale over everything and throw in some blues," then there is no reason to feel that I was separating you from the "experienced cats."

The changes you provide are interesting. Just so people realize that those aren't the standard changes - not that that's a bad thing. The Db7sus is the most "striking" to me as most people play that Db7 with a #11. It does work but just so people realize that if they play these changes on a gig with a horn player who isn't hip to them, they're going to get some funny looks. (I was at a jam session where I kept putting a sus4 on a chord that should have had a #11 on it and the more experienced sax player stopped his solo, turned to me and said, "Stop comping. Now." He stared at me until I took my fingers away from the strings. Then he resumed his solo. Let me tell you, you don't make that mistake a 4th time. )

As to the question of "why lydian-dominant," 4thstunings kind of touched on it. I approach it a little differently - If I encounter a non-diatonic whose function I don't know, I just look at the diatonic scale and make whatever adjustments I need to make the scale fit. Very often, you'll find that with these non-diatonic 7th chords that don't resolve down a 5th, that the #4 is in the home key, not the 4. Many these "dominant 7th chords that don't resolve down a 5th," tend to fall into the category of: IV7, bVI7, bVII7, or tritone sub - all of which tend to sound better with the #11, or lydian dominant. I'm sure you can find and exception, but that's why it's a "rule of thumb" - it's just a simple tool that's right most of the time. But it's a little easier for my students to get their heads around than trying to memorize what scale works with every chord function. Obviously, if it sounds bad, then screw the "rule."

Of course, that is a rationalistic approach. If you prefer empiricism, just try for yourself. I think that you'll find that lydian dominant sounds better there.

Peace,
Kevin

[Reg]

Boring laid back jazz gig with vocalist... sorry... Hey Kevin cool, sorry about being hard to understand...I would have thought someone with a great understanding of the English language would have a easy time understanding my chatter... Randall gets on me also... anyway I made a very quick sample of blues/ jazz soloing over just the A section... I'm too lazy to dig up chart, so it's rough...I just got back from boring gig where all I did was play simple jazz melodies for solos... behind vocalist. Anyway jazz it not so hung up on simple traditional voicing practices...I use #11and 11 also on the Db7, think linear or maybe how you treat M7th and maybe the sus thing will feel better. If you would really like I can try and use traditional music terminology and push that square peg through the round hole. I do get lazy but if you understand the single elements of for example; Blue note control system, you know blue notes... I'm sure control system is obvious in music, there are many... so when I'm making reference to harmonic control systems and refer to the organizational system controlling the harmony as also Blue notes I would think that would be obvious... or maybe not. How about I, VI, II, V... if your in Ionian or major you know what the full chordal structures are, right. so now add another control system... Blue notes, which would add different pitch collections to the progression... (different characteristic notes, intervals resolutions and function), you now have duel controlling systems... Do you really only use your studies as only source in understanding jazz... I'm looking forward to many great dialects and hopefully gigging together... Best Reg

[richb2]

We play this one but do it in a different key (A) due to our singers range. For the A part I stick fairly closely with the melody with occassional Am pent blues riffs. For the B part I see two 2-5-1's. For the first I play a bebop line from Les Wise's bebop Licks book(#36). For the second I play the beginning to a different bebop lick from Wise (#68). However over the dominant chord I play a melodic minor up a 5th and then go down to a 7b9 arpeggio, ending on a high E note.

[ksjazzguitar]

Hey Reg, sounds great.

I guess you could say that the Db7sus idea works in the same sense that Wes would do chromatic ii-Vs. I could see him subbing the Db7-C7 as Abm7-Db7-Gm7b5-C7. It works, it's just not how I'm used to hearing it.

Sorry Reg, I still have no idea what you mean by "control system." I did Google searches on "blue note control system" and "harmonic control system" and got no relevant results and could find nothing in my theory books. Yes, terminology is arbitrary (we're probably using different terms for the same thing), but you seem to be using some non-standard language. Could you point me in the direction of where your terminology originates?

Peace,
Kevin

[Reg]

Hey Kevin...for my early theory... I started at Cal. program was a little weak, then graduated with comp degree from Berklee in 70's, then Masters from UCLA ... not much either but at least had teaching job, and always looked good on resume...Was headed to Stanford but found plenty of work in L.A. yada, yada... Have you been through Berklee's classes, or any other accredited jazz program. How long have you been playing jazz...
OK... in the since that tonality superseded polyphonic modality and made possible an over-all concept of a piece of music from a harmonic point of view... I'm not sure I could play jazz without this, anyway now chords built on different scale degrees could be a source for determining a key center or tonic. Current usage of tonality accepts modal varieties, which opened the doors for modulation, modality, parallelism, pentatonic, whole tone, quarter-tone and chromatic modes, pandiatonicism, which are now simply thought of as "tonal control systems" and are firmly entrenched in current usage. Both Dallin and Persichetti make references to and L. Hibberd, make case for other side of debate... Tonality and Related Problems in Terminology. So from general sense of a single pitch as primary control of tonality to more than one pitch or different system as controlling tonality and extrapolate that process to other control systems... even Apel uses term... Where did you get your education in relationship to Jazz Harmony and Theory... Do you understand blue notes, beyond the Harvard Dictionary version? I would think so I'll skip that elaboration. Kevin, I'm not trying to be personal and if I say anything that rubs you wrong, I apologize now ... it's just I've been having these conversations for over twenty five years, and most of the time for no real reason except to justify or make that square peg fit into a round hole ... Am I getting close to your standards for authenticity... Why don't you post a version, of You Don't Know what Love Is,( playing sample would even be better) and give a classical analysis and we can make comparisons and we'll all gain from the process, or lets go through a tune that is much more complex and we'll lose everyone...Best Reg

[ksjazzguitar]

Reg,

Yes, I have a solid theory background. I'm finishing my MA and am doing grad work in both classical and jazz theory. I've studied at Mount Hood Community College (not impressive, but I did get to study jazz theory with Dave Bardoun), Portland State, and CSU - not to mention countless clinics and masterclasses. I've also read most of the classical theoretical works (Piston, Aldwell and Schacter, etc.) and many jazz theory works (Baker, Levine, Berliner, Haerle, Coker, Russo, Jaffe, Mehegan, etc.) In the course of my studies I've also read several historical theory works (Boethius, Fux, Jeppeson, Rameau, Schenker, Reinmann, etc.) And countless journal articles. (Yes, throwing around names is fun.) No, I haven't read much of the Berklee theory stuff beyond Leavitt.

I'm not contesting the content of what you are saying. I just don't understand the terminology. Even if you don't like my credentials, it should still be a simple matter to find it being used somewhere. It doesn't sound like you're saying anything beyond my ken, but I just need a primer to penetrate your choice of verbage. And I can't seem to find it anywhere. Again, I did a Google search on "tonal control system" and got nothing (other than audio tech stuff.) I also searched for this phrase on Google Scholar and JStor and got nothing. I was also able to search music journal database articles with each of those name but could find no phrase "tonal control system" (or even relevant "tonal control" references) in the online version of Grove's Dictionary of Music, The Oxford Dictionary of Music, and The Oxford Companion to Music.

Again I'm not saying that what you are saying is not useful. I assume it is otherwise I would be ignoring you. I just want to know where to find the definitions of these terms so I can understand what you are saying and relate it to the terminology that I've learned. But so far you are they only person I can remember using terms like, blue note control system," "blue pedal," "voiced lead lines," "duel source control methodology," and "tonal control system." I assume that you didn't make them up, but I have searched hard and can't find any reference to them, You've been studying jazz for 25 years and I've only been studying it for 15 - perhaps they fell out of favor in those ten years? (Which wouldn't make them wrong, just replaced with a different word. But still it should show up in a database search.) Or maybe we have just managed to have very different educational paths through different terminoligical circles (the choice of terminology is of course mostly arbitrary.) I think that my background is pretty broad. Is it possible that you've learned these terms from a few isolated teachers that use them but the terminology never made it into the mainstream?

But I want to understand. Can you give me the title of a theory work that defines these terms? Or at least a journal article I can look up on JStor or Google Scholar? (You mentioned the Hibberd article, but I could not get a copy of it online.) I just need one, our little Rosetta Stone. With work I can work through you non-linear, stream-of-consciousness sentence structure, but that doesn't help me if the vocabulary is completely foreign to anything I've been taught. You post long articles that obviously involve some thought. I'm sure we are saying similar things, but you are speaking French and I am speaking German. Perhaps you know my German, but I am having trouble penetrating your French.

Am I the only one? Is there anyone with a solid theory background who's run across the terminology, "blue note control system"? (It sounds like something out of a 50s jazz science fiction movie. "Commander Dick Storm races to save the planet Earth from the control of the evil Dr. Ming and his diabolical "Blue Note Control System'" [cue scary diminished chord on the organ.]) Maybe I need to read 30 more books, but I can't find the first one.

Please, I want to understand. Please, someone, give me one book so I can penetrate this language and equate it to the one I was taught.

Peace,
Kevin

[richb2]

Reg,


Am I the only one? Is there anyone with a solid theory background who's run across the terminology, "blue note control system"? (It sounds like something out of a 50s jazz science fiction movie. "Commander Dick Storm races to save the planet Earth from the control of the evil Dr. Ming and his diabolical "Blue Note Control System'" [cue scary diminished chord on the organ.]) Maybe I need to read 30 more books, but I can't find the first one.

Kevin, I can assure that in my two fields of "solid theory", engineering and accounting, we do not have the term "blue note control system". Does one need a degree in something to post up here? I doubt that the household names in jazz even went to college. Live and let live, I say....

[ksjazzguitar]

...I doubt that the household names in jazz even went to college. ...

Nowadays they do.

I'm just trying to understand what Reg is saying. The terminology has to originate somewhere. He seems to be using a very different terminology than I have heard use in jazz circles. Maybe it's just me.

Peace,
Kevin

[Reg]

Hey Kevin ... I give up and as you said you already understand... I said I was combining terms( single elements) to shorten explanations... Like Expanded Tonality, Change of Mode Theory, Duel Modality, polytonality. All very common compositional terms in traditional music but do crossover to jazz. Leon Dallin make reference to the change of mode theory and how obviously the principle can be applied to other chord structures, the interchanging of complex chord forms and modalities. What is polytonality... a specific kind of tonal organization.
Check out John Vincent's The Diatonic Modes In Modern Music, 1974, I have copy somewhere... Since you understand concepts, why don't you explain what I mean in language that works for you... and will all have a clear understanding.

[P4guitar]

What ever happened to that old and apparently abandoned theory "if it sounds good, it's correct."?

Frankly my eyes glaze over when I hear phrygian, locrian and other terminology designed to separate one group of people from another.

My ears are like Kevin's as there are notes that definitely don't work for me and I have a system for playing changes as he does (not the same system of course, my system is very basic: see chord play notes) ...but I really enjoy Reg's bluesy approach and I'd like to hear him describe it in lay terms, not according to some arcane theory.

[ksjazzguitar]

Reg,

I don't need an explanation of "Expanded Tonality," "Change of Mode Theory," "Duel [sic] Modality," and "polytonality." Please don't insult my intelligence, we call get that stuff as undergrads. Even if we don't we can look up those terms on wikipedia.

I was looking for terms like "blue note control system," "blue pedal," "voiced lead lines," and "duel source control methodology." (They sound like something Martino would dream up - I always found his terminology ridiculous.) If they are part of your personal theory system, that's fine, but then don't surprised if you are the only one who know what a "blue note control system" is.

Unfortunately the only book you mention seems to be out of print. I'll check it out when I get the the University's library next week, but if it's just more modal theory, then it's old hat.

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I'm trying to do the respectful thing. The disrespectful (and easiest) thing to do would be to just assume that you're making up words and ignore the bulk of your posts while I roll my eyes. But I'm trying to be respectful and genuinely understand what you're saying. I want to understand because in the windows of comprehensibility in your posts you seem to be saying interesting things, but then you start throwing in comprehension speed bumps like "blue note control system." Sometimes I read your post 3 times and I'm still not sure what you're saying - part of it is the syntactic structure, but usually it is the esoteric terminology that I find impenetrable. In the words of Shakespeare, it is "too cunning to be understood." (OK, I use a lots of big words too, but they can all be found with a simple web search for those who don't know them.)

I'll try and ask once more, simply. Where do I find and explanation of what "harmonic control system" means?

Peace,
Kevin

[Reg]

Hey... Kevin wasn't trying to insult yours intelligence or any one else... I'm simply trying to explain jazz examples in simple common terms, if you look at single words and connect their meanings, many times is much easier to understand than half a page of BS. Sorry but I've reach my limit for justification... If you don't appreciate how I explain things... that's the way it is...I'm OK with it, if your not I'm sorry... Best Reg

[ksjazzguitar]

...I'll try and ask once more, simply. Where do I find [an] explanation of what "harmonic control system" means?...

So, I guess the answer is, "no"?

Really? It's too much to ask for the title of a book? Or the theorist with whom this terminology originates? From where or whom did you get the phrase "harmonic control system"?

...if you look at single words and connect their meanings, many times is much easier to understand than half a page of BS.

But not if those words have no standard meaning in the topic being discussed, then they don't mean anything. If describe a chord substitution as a "standard elephant canister flapjack sub," then that means nothing because those words have no meaning in the subject being discussed, unless I define them. The fact that they have meaning in other contexts is meaningless.

And who says half a page has to be BS? Are those the only choices: "single words and [connect their] meanings" that no one understands or "half a page of BS"? I think you missed two other choices. Standard terminology that everyone understands, or half a page of cogent explanation. Those were options too.

Sorry but I've reach my limit for justification... If you don't appreciate how I explain things... that's the way it is...

But I'm not aware that you really explained anything. I asked about some specific terms you used and you avoided them (failing to define even one) and rambled on about some terms that every 3rd year undergrad knows. You questioned my education, threw out a couple of names and mentioned an out-of-print book that doesn't seem to be on the topic anyway. That's not an explanation; it's avoiding an explanation. It's what politicians do when they want to avoid the question. If you can show me where you answered the simple question, "Where do I find an explanation of what 'harmonic control system' means?" then I will apologize and happily read on the subject.

I'm not asking you to "justify" yourself. I'm asking for a simple hint in deciphering your own little theory code that you seem to have invented. Look, if you want to invent your own cryptic terminology (increasingly my conclusion) or use esoteric terminology that (apparently) no one else has heard, then you are going to have to get used to a lot of people not knowing what you are talking about. I'm not sure what your purpose in doing this would be other than obfuscating your meaning. I suspect that there are many others like me, but few have the interest of juevos to ask. Communication is all about being understood. Inventing secret terminology is the opposite of that. I'm not sure why you bother typing if you don't want to be understood. Rambling sentence fragments and words of which only you know the meaning in this context - that doesn't help.

You can obviously play, but until you start using terminology that the rest of the music community uses (or at least define your terms so that you're not the only one who understand them) then I (and I suspect many others) will have to stare at your posts in bewilderment. You might was well be writing in Aramaic half the time. But if that makes you feel good, then keep making up your own terminology and go ahead feeling superior in that no one will ever understand what you are saying. Hey, maybe your terminology is superior and should be used in place of the terminology that the entire rest of the musical world is using. But just using the terms and refusing to define them does not accomplish that goal.

Really, when you were getting your MA, they let you get away with that? If I walked into one of my grad classes and started barking out an opinion laced with invented terms, and refused to define them or cite sources ... I don't think I would last five minutes.

I apologize for caring enough to try to understand what you are saying. But if you don't care if we understand what you are saying, then I guess I'll have to stop too.

Peace,
Kevin