Jazz Lines

[bobsguitars09]

What are some "typical" Jazz "Lines"? If you were to break them down into the amount of notes and numerical order of the key/scale you are playing. what would they be?

scale 1234567 Common Jazz line? 1235? or what? How many numbers are common in a common jazz line? 3? 5? 6?

[docbop]

There are lots of books and resources on creating Jazz lines a good book discussed a lot recently here is Bert Ligon on Linear Harmony.

The best education is start transcribing and analyzing the lines you transcribe. They are great players who don't play a lot of notes like Jim Hall, much to be learned from studying his playing. The players like Pat Martino who plays lots of notes, but still has great phrasing going on. Then don't just listen/transcribe guitar player listen to the legendary saxes players. Sax lines tend to lay well on the guitar, I've been listening to a lot of Sonny Stitt lately.

Key is study lines for rhythm and pitches over what chords, then sit and make up twenty similar lines of your own. Also sing all these lines to help with phrasing and ear training.

[mr. beaumont]

never sounds bad to start a line from the third, or end on a third or seventh of the "chord of the moment."

What do you hope this information will give you? Sounds like a lot of unecessary complication.

[ksjazzguitar]

I think that you're trying to get too abstract and analytical about it. (And if I'm saying that then you know that you've gone too far.)

I would just spend some time learning some and learning how they work - the way the line functions is much more important than superficial features like how many notes it has and what note it starts on. (Though I would say that many good jazz lines will start on a chord tone or a chromatic approach and will end on a chord tone.)

Ligon's book on linear harmony sounds like it's breaking things down how you like. I have a "lick of the month" page on my site if you want to check it out. It discusses how the lick is working. And just transcribing, understanding, and absorbing can't be overstressed.

Peace,
Kevin

[bobsguitars09]

Thanks everyone!

I am actually just trying to break it down to simple numbers sort of like how you can break down a 12 bar blues or common blues things. 1-4-5 and all of that.

[mr. beaumont]

Wait, so now I'm confused--do you mean the licks themselves or common things that are happening behind the licks? (chord changes)

[bobsguitars09]

Just using chord changes as a example of how we break down blues changes and all of that and trying to do this with common melody/jazz lines in jazz.

what is a common blues? 1-4-5 what would some common melodies/jazz lines be
in numerical form? 1-3-6-5? or? and how many notes are typical in a good jazz line or statement? I think transcribing is perfect for me on this but I want to see what orders of notes and how many notes are typical in a good jazz line. very broad question I know

[mr. beaumont]

see, but this is where I'm losing you. 1-4-5 refers to chords, and the structure of a blues.

[ksjazzguitar]

But chord progressions are much less varied than melodic lines. There really isn't some archtypical jazz line. There are certain features that may or may not show up, but not a universal structure. Frankly, I think that it would make improv pretty boring if there were.

The other problem is that the line has to be considered in it's harmonic context which is changing underneath. Are you numbers relative to the key or the chord?

Peace,
Kevin

[MarkRhodes]

Jerry Coker's Patterns for Jazz includes a wealth of material broken down in this way. For example, a common pattern is 1-2-3-5. (Coltrane used this about 100 times in his "Giant Steps" solo.) Other common ones are 1-3-5-3, 5-3-1-3, or a 5-3-2-1 followed by a 1-3-2-5 on the next chord.

Bert Ligon holds that three outlines cover a lot of great jazz improv: 3-2-1-7, 1-3-5-7, and 5-3-1-7. His "Connecting Lines With Linear Harmony" provides hundreds of examples from solos by the greats as well as a lot of exercises for getting the outlines "under your fingers." The most common embellishments are also covered.

[ksjazzguitar]

...Bert Ligon holds that three outlines cover a lot of great jazz improv: 3-2-1-7, 1-3-5-7, and 5-3-1-7. ...

Forgive me, but I haven't read the book, just heard abstracts of it.

But those cells are of course not a complete line, but are just how a portion of a line might be expressed. Of course, he wants that 7 to resolve to the 3 of the next chord, so it by definition can't be complete.

And I find his math to be a little Procrustean - the idea that the greats played chord tones that lead to a guide tone resolution is pretty obvious. (But perhaps it is something that our chord/scale world needs to hear.) And of course most lines do not follow this schema - the Bird solos I analyzed only resolved about 25% of the guide tones. But perhaps you could say that he is showing the largest category and an extremely important category that gets overlooked nowadays.

But I do agree that it sounds like a great book and a much neglected approach. And it is probably as close as we can get to what the OP wants. I just don't want it overhyped.

Peace,
Kevin

[whiskey02]

This might be what you're looking for; Reno De Stefano, jazz guitarist
Scroll down to the examples beneath the picture os Wes. Check out #3 & #5 first.

[MarkRhodes]

But those cells are of course not a complete line, but are just how a portion of a line might be expressed. Of course, he wants that 7 to resolve to the 3 of the next chord, so it by definition can't be complete

Kevin, that's why they're called "outlines" rather than "lines." The greats embellish them in all sorts of ways.

It helps to learn them as quarter note lines (-which become 8th note lines when chords last but two beats.) The first one---3-2-1-7---is the most common one. It works by itself and is the most common outline to follow the other two (1-3-5-7 and 5-3-1-7).

I'm learning a Sonny Stitt solo that opens with 5-3-2-1 over Bb7 leading into a 3-2-1-7 over a G7. I learned that line (-over the same rhythm changes in one of Ligon's exercises.) So contrary to your claim, they *can* be (and are) used by great players as lines on actual recordings of lasting merit. But again, they're called **outlines** because that stresses the direction of the line, however gussied up it may be along the way. (And Ligon's book shows lots of gussied up examples.)

[bobsguitars09]

I LOVE THIS FORUM


Maybe we can expand this a little and..

What are the common Lines/Progressions that

Wes Montgomery used?

Joe Pass?

Dexter Gordon?

Louis Armstrong?

and so on and so on

[ksjazzguitar]

Kevin, that's why they're called "outlines" rather than "lines." The greats embellish them in all sorts of ways.

I realize he didn't mean that that was all there was. I took it to mean that these are the skeletons, much like we do in Schenkerian reduction, which might have been part of the inspiration.

I'm just saying that glancing through the Omnibook, I see that most lines don't conform to this. Many do. Perhaps you could argue that the ones that do are the strongest lines - I might agree with that. And I definitely agree that this is something that is missing from a lot of modern players, something that used to be an assumed part of the jazz language.

But it sounds like a great book, and I look forward to looking through it. It sounds like something I'd really enjoy. I'll read it with an open mind and let him make his case.

Peace,
Kevin

[MarkRhodes]

I'm just saying that glancing through the Omnibook, I see that most lines don't conform to this. Many do.

Geez, don't put yourself out looking into something, Kevin. Even if one just looked at the Omnibook, half of it is devoted to blues soloing. Outlines work there too, but blues playing emphasizes idiomatic phrases and feeling more than "making the changes."

[JonR]

- the idea that the greats played chord tones that lead to a guide tone resolution is pretty obvious. (But perhaps it is something that our chord/scale world needs to hear.)

You could be right.

[max_power]

Even if one just looked at the Omnibook, half of it is devoted to blues soloing.

What?

[MarkRhodes]

What?

Yeah, the Omnibook. Sixty Parker solos, a large percentage of them blues. This is news to you?

Au Privave, Back Home Blues, Barbados, Billie's Bounce, Bloomdido, Buzzy, Cosmic Rays, KC Blues, Now's the Time (No.1 and No.2), Blues (Fast), Blues for Alice (-a "Bird" blues, with lots of ii-Vs added, but with these Parker uses a lot of outlines), Si Si, Mohawk (No. 1 and No. 2), Parker's Mood, Cheryl, Chi Chi, Perhaps....

[ksjazzguitar]

I wasn't looking at the blues. Take "Confirmation" for example. In the first 16 bars of the solo, I see 20 resolutions of motion down a 5th, creating an opportunity for the golden b7-3 guide tone resolution. Of those, Bird only resolves three definitively: m.2 (D->C#), m.11 (G->F# with and anticipation), and m.13 (G->F#). You can maybe argue that there are two more that are a little disguised: mm.2-3 (G->F) and mm.7-8 (F->E, from beat 4 to beat 2 of the next measure.) I suppose you could call mm.15-16 (F->Eb) but I think that that one is too strained.

So by my count, out of 20, he resolved 3-5 guide tones, about 15-25%. That's great, but not quite the "majority" that I hear people talking about. And I don't really see these "3-2-1-7, 1-3-5-7, and 5-3-1-7" that I keep hearing about. Feel free to point out if I missed something.

Granted, as I said before, I haven't read his book. But I have done a lot of reduction analysis and have done this type of interval analysis on jazz licks before.

Look, it sounds like a great book. I look forward to checking it out. It's just that some of the hype that I'm hearing seems a little exaggerated. It sounds a little Procrustean, but I could say the same about Schenker. But it sounds like a great book. I look forward to checking it out.

Maybe he's right, but it just doesn't jive with what I'm seeing so I'm going to need some convincing.

Peace,
Kevin

[MarkRhodes]

Granted, as I said before, I haven't read his book.

Let me know if you ever bother.

[ksjazzguitar]

I found an excerpt and read the first 32 pages. I'm convinced that I understand what he's saying. When I look at real world solos, I still don't see it with the ubiquity that seems to be implied. Can someone point it out in that "Confirmation" solo I mentioned?

Peace,
Kevin

[JonR]

I found an excerpt and read the first 32 pages. I'm convinced that I understand what he's saying. When I look at real world solos, I still don't see it with the ubiquity that seems to be implied. Can someone point it out in that "Confirmation" solo I mentioned?

Peace,
Kevin

I don't have Ligon's book, but I do have the Omnibook and I like a challenge.
If I understand the patterns right, it's basically arpeggios, yes? with a common passing 2 between 1 and 3.
Charlie Parker's playing is generally pretty packed with arpeggios, and at first glance I'd say Confirmation is atypical. But any Parker solo ought to be worth analysing.
I suspect a lot of the problem is that if we allow embellishments of the arp patterns, then just about anything can fit. A scale run is an arpeggio with passing notes!
Eg if we take markerhodes' notion of the patterns as quarter notes (if the chord lasts 1 bar), then we have an example right away in bar 1 (of the solo, line 9 of the transcription):

F chord , F-Eb-D-Db-C-Bb-A-A in 8th notes. The quarters would be F D C A, or 1-6-5-3. Maybe it's not common to have a 6th in the pattern, I don't know. Looks to me like an arpeggio based run though, seeing as the chord tones are on the beats.

But I don't suppose we should be looking at that kind of "embellishment". Are there clearer examples of the 4-note patterns mentioned above? I'm just going to try spotting arpeggios, whether they suit the given concept or not.

Bar 3: Dm chord, 5-3-1.
Bar 5: Bb7 chord, embellished 1-7-5 phrase.
Bar 6: D7, 3-5-7-b9 (stop me if 9s don't count...or should they be called 2?)
Bar 7: G7, 3-5-7-9, 9-7-5 (ditto...)
(Bar 11 has a D harmonic minor scale run, of the kind Mark Levine claimed was too hard to find to make it worth talking about much )
Bar 13: Bb7, 3-5-7-9 (the 7 is notated as A natural, oddly - I haven't checked the track to see if this is correct)
Bar 14: D7, 3-b9-7 (the Omnibook seems prone to enharmonic errors, showing F#s as Gbs)
Bar 16: F, 3-5-7-9... (a pattern seems to be developing...)
Bar 18: F7, 9-7-5-3, with a passing 4.
Bar 19: Bb, 3-5-7-9... (this is developing into an obsession on Bird's part...) - phrase ends on a 3-5 in the next bar

I'll stop there. Partly I'm bored, partly I may be missing the point. I certainly can't see any 1-2-3-5s. As for 1-3-5-7s, I guess you can argue that all those 3-5-7-9s are superimposed 1-3-5-7s...

Over to you...

[ksjazzguitar]

...I'm learning a Sonny Stitt solo that opens with 5-3-2-1 over Bb7 leading into a 3-2-1-7 over a G7. I learned that line (-over the same rhythm changes in one of Ligon's exercises.) So contrary to your claim, they *can* be (and are) used by great players as lines on actual recordings of lasting merit. ...

Again, I don't know how many different ways to say this - I'm not saying that they don't exist. I simply doubt their ubiquity. Saying, "I disagree with the hype that this is the prototypical lick on which most licks are based." is not the same as saying, "There are no examples of this anywhere." I'm saying the former but you seem to be hearing the latter.

It sounds like a good book. It sounds very consistent with what I teach (thinking of chord tones, resolving guide tones, etc.) I'm just saying that it seems a little overhyped and overstated - at least from what I've been hearing.

Peace,
Kevin

[MarkRhodes]

[QUOTE=JonR;129719]I
Eg if we take markerhodes' notion of the patterns as quarter notes /QUOTE]

No, no, no. The outlines are *taught* in quarter note exercises (-when chords last a full measure, as in a blues). With rhythm changes, the patterns are eighth notes because each chords lasts but two beats (-except during the bridge).

Further, the outlines don't apply when improvisers are doing *other* things (-such as 'harmonic generalization,' where a group of chords are treated as one tonality (-hell, Charlie Christian could treat 8 measures of rhythm changes as if it were all the I chord, with a hint of the IV in bar 5) or developing a motive. (This can include working with cells; Coltrane's solo on "Giant Steps" leans heavily on the 1-2-3-5 cell; he isn't *trying* to "connect the chords" in the sense we're talking about at all. He is deliberately--relentlessly-- doing something else.)

Ligon claimed that after transcribing hundreds of solos, he found that when improvisers were being "harmonically specific" (-which, again, they aren't always), the three most *common* outlines are the ones he gives. That is all. He never said no one ever does anything else in a jazz solo. He emphasizes learning to play "harmonically specific" lines because it seems to be the area where most budding improvisers are weakest.

As for embellishments, he considers at least a dozen common ones (-delayed resolution, anticipation, octave displacement, sawtooth, iteration, C.E.S.H., neighbor tones, passing tones, and so on) and gives many of examples of each. Charlie Parker is the third-most cited source of examples, coming in ahead of Bill Evans and Cannonball Adderley, though behind Clifford Brown and Tom Harrell. Lou Donaldson is cited but once, though it's a 96-bar solo on "There Will Never Be Another You," from the Blakey band's "Live at Birdland" record. A Harrell solo is included too, though I don't know the standard it's from. Harrell is used as an example of a "contemporary" sound, while Parker takes things back a ways, and Brownie is more recent but still some-time-ago.