Pat Martino Quantum guitar (moving 7#5 chords in minor thirds)

[LJP]

Does anyone understand Pat’s reasoning for moving 7#5 chords in minor thirds to use as substitutions? 7b9s I understand …

here’s the reference video

[Mick-7]

I believe he said major 3rds, augmented triads repeat themselves every 4 frets.

For example:
C9b5/#5: | x-(3)-4-3-3-x | >> | x-(7)-8-7-7-x | >> | x-(11)-12-11-11-x |

In fact you can actually move this symmetrical chord voicing up in whole steps, i.e., every 2 frets.

[pamosmusic]

Does anyone understand Pat’s reasoning for moving 7#5 chords in minor thirds to use as substitutions? 7b9s I understand …

here’s the reference video

time stamp?

[Mick-7]

time stamp?

At about 4 min. into the video he talks about the aug/minor(^7) chord voicing and says it "moves in major 3rds as opposed to minor 3rds."

I do hope that video lesson comes with written notation!

[pamosmusic]

At about 4 min. into the video he talks about the aug/minor(^7) chord voicing and says it "moves in major 3rds as opposed to minor 3rds."

Oh okay. Yeah if that’s the spot OP is talking about then it’s that augmented chord being symmetrical like you said.

Wasnt sure if there was somewhere else where that 7#5 was mentioned specifically. Thats a nice whole tone shape that moves I major seconds too. Fun stuff.

[Mick-7]

l'm not familiar with Pat's theoretical approach, he thinks of dom.7th chords in terms of their related IIm7 chord, is that it? - for example, Em7 for A7.

[pamosmusic]

l'm not familiar with Pat's theoretical approach, he thinks of dom.7th chords in terms of their related IIm7 chord, is that it? - for example, Em7 & Em7b5 for A7.

Honestly he can be really dense when he speaks about it … lots of theory and pretty complex conceptions and stuff. The famous bit is the conversion to minor bit … so dominant is the related minor off the fifth, major is the relative minor, half diminshed is minor off the b3 etc.

[Mick-7]

Honestly he can be really dense when he speaks about it … lots of theory and pretty complex conceptions and stuff. The famous bit is the conversion to minor bit … so dominant is the related minor off the fifth, major is the relative minor, half diminished is minor off the b3 etc.

Jeez, what a mind! I'll have to think about that. What make of guitar is he playing in this video?

[pamosmusic]

Jeez, what a mind! I'll have to think about that. What make of guitar is he playing in this video?

Not sure the model but I believe in the 80s they came included with purchase of the sweater.

[LJP]

Hey all thanks for chiming in. I should have included a time stamp. It at about the 24 min mark where he’s moving from A7#5 to Eb7#5 to Gb7#5 and C7#5 (maybe not in that order). And all over A. Then he demonstrated playing his minor 7th subs over all those chords.

[pamosmusic]

Hey all thanks for chiming in. I should have included a time stamp. It at about the 24 min mark where he’s moving from A7#5 to Eb7#5 to Gb7#5 and C7#5 (maybe not in that order). And all over A. Then he demonstrated playing his minor 7th subs over all those chords.

Oh okay yeah. That’s a relic of his minor conversion thing. He uses m7 stuff for pretty much every chord. So He’s getting that altered dominant sound by putting the minor 7 chord down a whole step from the dominant chord and then cycling through diminished subs.

So I guess the question could be framed as …

He’s playing Bbm7 against C7 and putting that whole thing over A … why does the Bbm7 work as an A dominant sub?

Short answer … it doesnt.

Having killer vocabulary that sort of approximates the sound of those outside dominant sounds is all people are looking for. It’s not really necessary that the sounds fit perfectly over the chord in question. And consolidating all his harmony into those minor chords frees him up to just work on developing more and more monster vocabulary in that one sound, rather than splitting his focus on a bunch of scale sounds and junk. So he gets creative about where to move those minor chords to get the sounds he wants, and bobs your uncle.

So for that C7#5 over A … He plays these blistering minor lines that sound awesome, the voiceleading of that Bbm7 (Bb Db F Ab) is almost identical to the more typical altered scale thing over A (Bb Db F A), so he’s able to land the plane and it smokes.

Not sure if that makes sense.

[Mick-7]

Hey all thanks for chiming in. I should have included a time stamp. It at about the 24 min mark where he’s moving from A7#5 to Eb7#5 to Gb7#5 and C7#5 (maybe not in that order). And all over A. Then he demonstrated playing his minor 7th subs over all those chords.

Probably the same principle applied to tritone substitutes, for example:
| x-(7)-8-7-7-x | = C7b5 & Gb7#5

So I suppose the relative minor connection is:
| x-(4)-6-5-5-x | = Dbm^7, which occurs in the Db melodic minor scale, and can be played over Gm7b5/C7(alt) & Dbm7b5/Gb7#11.

And he's moving the Dbm^7 chord up in minor 3rds, i.e., to Em^7, Gm^7 and Bbm^7 - some such shenanigans.

[Bob_Ross]

What make of guitar is he playing in this video?

Pretty sure that's a Sam Koontz. [edit: I'm wrong, see below, it's an Abe Rivera]

btw, all Pat's talk of changing one note in a diminished or augmented chord to form a "related" (?!?!) major or minor or dominant chord, reminds me of this story from the way-back machine:

I was at the Berklee College of Music the summer of 1977, and Pat Martino was in town for some shows at Paul's Mall or The Jazz Workshop...and word somehow got around school that Pat was also offering lessons during the days that he was in town. For $25/hour. Which, in 1977, was insanely high for guitar lessons! But me and a bunch of my classmates all agreed that a lesson with Pat Martino would be a real feather-in-the-cap, so a bunch of us pooled our money to get the $25 together, then drew straws to decide who would go study with Pat, with the understanding that the winner would then return and share everything he'd learned with all us "financiers"

So Mr. Short Straw (not me) goes and takes a guitar lesson with Pat Martino. Comes back the next day with pages and pages of notes that he'd written down during his lesson, diagrams, weird geometric shapes, some standard musical notation, a few fretboard/fingering charts... He starts trying to explain Pat's concept. It's dense, complicated, comprehensive, erudite. So much information! But well worth $25, we agree, even if most of us could barely wrap our heads around it.

One week later the June '77 issue of Guitar Player Magazine hits the stands. Pat Martino is the artist on the cover. And the interview/article with him includes 100% of the material that he taught Mr. Short Straw the week before, only more clearly explained and with much better diagrams. And it only cost $3 for the issue.

:facepalm:

[paulkogut]

The guitar is an Abe Rivera

https://jedistar.com/abe-rivera-2/

I took 2 lessons from Pat in the late '80's, that's the guitar he was playing!

I haven't had a chance to check out the video in depth, but mostly the idea of playing 'this' scale over 'that' chord comes down to a few common tones and a lot of rhythmic confidence...

PK

[wolflen]

I believe he said major 3rds, augmented triads repeat themselves every 4 frets.

For example:
C9b5/#5: | x-(3)-4-3-3-x | >> | x-(7)-8-7-7-x | >> | x-(11)-12-11-11-x |

In fact you can actually move this symmetrical chord voicing up in whole steps, i.e., every 2 frets.

A bit confusing..his playing examples moved the 7#5s in Minor 3rds ?? Gb7#5 to A to C to Eb

Originally Posted by LJP

Hey all thanks for chiming in. I should have included a time stamp. It at about the 24 min mark where he’s moving from A7#5 to Eb7#5 to Gb7#5 and C7#5 (maybe not in that order).

I think some research on his approach and written material would help alot.

[Mick-7]

A bit confusing..his playing examples moved the 7#5s in Minor 3rds ?? Gb7#5 to A to C to Eb

No, if I understood him correctly the V7th b5/#5 chords move in major 3rds, and their relative IIm7(alt) chords move in minor 3rds, as I suggested earlier:

I suppose the relative minor connection is:
| x-(4)-6-5-5-x | = Dbm^7, which occurs in the Db melodic minor scale, and can be played over Gm7b5/C7(alt) & Dbm7b5/Gb7#11.

And he's moving the Dbm^7 chord up in minor 3rds, i.e., to Em^7, Gm^7 and Bbm^7

The Bbm^7 & Em^7 (it's tritone substitute), will work with Eb7 & A7; and the Dbm^7 & Gm^7 will work with Gb7(alt) & C7(alt).

They are melodic minor substitutes. For example, the "inside" subs are: Bbm^7 (mm scale = Bb-C-Db-Eb-F-G-A) over Eb7(#11) and Em^7 (mm scale = E-F#-G-A-B-C#-D#) over A7(#11). But I would add the b7th to the scales for the IIm7 chords (Bbm7 & Em7), it sounds o.k. over IIm7b5 chords.

Reversing those will provide the "outside" subs: Bbm^7 over A7(b5/#5/b9#9) and Em^7 over Eb7(b5/#5/b9#9). Same system with Gb7 & C7.

It's based on the fact that the IIm(^7)/ bVIm(^7) & V7(b5/#5) chords all contain an augmented triad. It's an interesting way to relate minor/half-dim chords to augmented/whole tone chords and tie in the b5 sub concept.

[GuyBoden]

I have most of Pat Martino's DVD tutorials.

Yes, it's all 'The minorisation of everything'. I find it more beneficial to copy the licks.

Here's a short, memorable and useable Pat Martino lick from a Tutorial:

[GuyBoden]

I have most of Pat Martino's DVD tutorials.

Yes, it's all 'The minorisation of everything'. I find it more beneficial to copy the licks.

Here's a short, memorable and useable Pat Martino lick from a Tutorial:

Interestingly to me at least, this very same lick can be converted to a Dominant lick, if that's your preference:

[GuyBoden]

Interestingly to me at least, this very same lick can be converted to a Dominant lick, if that's your preference:

Obviously, the very same lick can also be seen as a Dorian Lick:

[Alter]

You can easily see the Dom7 substitutions coming out of the half whole diminished scale. Improvise a half whole diminished scale over a G7 and it moves in minor thirds, so it gives you G7 Bb7 Db7 E7, all resolving to a Cmaj7 using the diminished scale. Then instead of using the diminished play the altered scale (or any other dominant scale) over these chords for more of an out sound, alter the chords, etc. It all works because of the harmonic idea behind it. If one can hear it and phrase it that is, as Pat Martino so brilliantly does on this videotape! And that tone! almost sounds like a bass hehe

[Mick-7]

These examples of Hexatonic scales/chords from my Slonimsky thread are related to this subject:

[Dean_G]

The way I see/hear it, one shouldn't get too particular about dominant extensions unless it is in conflict (as you might perceive it) with the melody. Especially like with singers. If you allow for that proposition, and work with functional equivalents, all extensions are available simultaneously. This expands the harmonic palette with #11,5,#5,b9,9,#9. Vincent Persichetti called simultaneous sounding of the extensions "double inflections". Add this idea to the symmetrical dominant scales, ie half-whole and whole tone. In the first case dominant 7ths are generated each m3rd interval, and each step of the whole tone. So any of those dominants can have any extension you LIKE. This is kind of backwards way of converting to minor. I am not thinking of those two scales per se, but the chromatic areas and related tonalities they imply. But it's all ear judgement and context ultimately. Still it another way of organizing relationships.

[Christian Miller]

The way I see/hear it, one shouldn't get too particular about dominant extensions unless it is in conflict (as you might perceive it) with the melody. Especially like with singers. If you allow for that proposition, and work with functional equivalents, all extensions are available simultaneously. This expands the harmonic palette with #11,5,#5,b9,9,#9. Vincent Persichetti called simultaneous sounding of the extensions "double inflections". Add this idea to the symmetrical dominant scales, ie half-whole and whole tone. In the first case dominant 7ths are generated each m3rd interval, and each step of the whole tone. So any of those dominants can have any extension you LIKE. This is kind of backwards way of converting to minor. I am not thinking of those two scales per se, but the chromatic areas and related tonalities they imply. But it's all ear judgement and context ultimately. Still it another way of organizing relationships.

The bebop approach is to play to really extend and alter the dominants as you see fit - even where this runs contrary to the prevailing key. You have things like V13 being used in a minor key and so on. Bar 2 of Blues for Alice has this for instance

Barry Harris taught us not to worry about matching the extensions. For example on Cherokee and if you drill down into Bird’s approach you will see he tended to play bVII mixolydian (dominant) rather than the more ‘correct’ Lydian dominant.

As you go into the second generation bop players you see that they are ‘copy/pasting’ II V licks regardless of modality.

OTOH if you are playing a Wayne shorter tune like Iris it feels necessary to pay some care and attention to the exact nature of the chord qualities, although Waynes own approach seems to me to have been principally melodic.

There’s things that feel in the middle to me, like Jobim tunes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

Pretty sure that's a Sam Koontz. [edit: I'm wrong, see below, it's an Abe Rivera]

btw, all Pat's talk of changing one note in a diminished or augmented chord to form a "related" (?!?!) major or minor or dominant chord, reminds me of this story from the way-back machine:

I was at the Berklee College of Music the summer of 1977, and Pat Martino was in town for some shows at Paul's Mall or The Jazz Workshop...and word somehow got around school that Pat was also offering lessons during the days that he was in town. For $25/hour. Which, in 1977, was insanely high for guitar lessons! But me and a bunch of my classmates all agreed that a lesson with Pat Martino would be a real feather-in-the-cap, so a bunch of us pooled our money to get the $25 together, then drew straws to decide who would go study with Pat, with the understanding that the winner would then return and share everything he'd learned with all us "financiers"

So Mr. Short Straw (not me) goes and takes a guitar lesson with Pat Martino. Comes back the next day with pages and pages of notes that he'd written down during his lesson, diagrams, weird geometric shapes, some standard musical notation, a few fretboard/fingering charts... He starts trying to explain Pat's concept. It's dense, complicated, comprehensive, erudite. So much information! But well worth $25, we agree, even if most of us could barely wrap our heads around it.

One week later the June '77 issue of Guitar Player Magazine hits the stands. Pat Martino is the artist on the cover. And the interview/article with him includes 100% of the material that he taught Mr. Short Straw the week before, only more clearly explained and with much better diagrams. And it only cost $3 for the issue.

:facepalm:

Haha! With these celebrity players it can end up being that you get their ‘spiel’ in the lesson.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GuyBoden]

I do hope that video lesson comes with written notation!

I have the DVD, which includes a notated booklet.

Here's a small part of the line, but up an octave: