Default Harmony?

[JonnyPac]

I will post a big explination (as much as I can) as soon as I get enough time. Probly this weekend sometime. Stoked.

[timscarey]

So,

I'm going to cut to the good stuff because I know who my audience is here. I've never really shared this without a piano in front of me and a book, but here it goes....

I should also mention that this is just a few chapters in a much bigger book, these chapters do not deal with tonal harmony.

Macrodiatonic refers to the infulence two adjacent chords have on each other's inside choice scale.

"A Macrodiatonic relationship exists between any two chords regardless of chord type or interval between the roots. In other words, any chord can follow any other chord in a progression, and the two will have a macrodiatonic relationship based on the inside choice of *variable tones that each has in common with the other. The relationship is the most essential expression of the harmony created by the two chords."

Ex. Fm7 (Variable tone = D or Db) next to DMaj7 (Variable tone G or G#)

yields an inside choice of F Dorian to D ionian

All chords have at least on variable tone in the scale associated with them.

The inside choice scale effects the "tonicness" of a chord within a progression, we have 3 different levels of tonicness available they are

Tonic- ionian, aeolean, *phrygian (tonic)
non- tonic - Dorian, Lydian, Locrian
M.M. (non-tonic) - all melodic minor modes

Chord types and associated tonic/non-tonic inside choice scales....

Maj7 - Ionian/Lydian
m7 - Aeolean, phrygian,*Phrygadorian/Dorian
m7(b5) - Locrian/Locrian +2, Altered scale
Maj(b5) - Lydian/Lydian +5
m6 - Dorian/Melodic Minor
Dom7 - Mixolydian/Mixo +4, Mixo b6
7Alt - **Altered scale

*the 2nd mode of melodic minor has a mysterious tonicness too it that Jim calls "the phrygadorian mystery" as does the phrygian minor 7th chord

**the altered dominant chord has only one scale choice.

Now, this leads us into parent scales, which is where this begins leading into the theory of modal resolution.... here we go.

C (major) parent scale....

CMaj7 - ionian
Dm7 - Dorian
Dm6 - Dorian/M.m.
Em7 - phrygian, phrygadorian
FMaj7 - Lydian
FMaj7(b5) Lydian/lydian +5
G7 - Mixolydian/Mixo +4
Am7 - Aeolean
Bm7(b5) Locrian/Locrian +2, Altered scale
C#7 Alt

One thing you might notice is that he says that D mm is derivative of C major scale via the raised "conversion tone" in this case C becomes C#, there fore all Dmm chords are from the C parent scale and should be treated as such when calculating resolution/non-resolution.

Resolution between parent scales

As chords change in a modal harmonic environment, it is also true that their parent scales will change (not always of course) in the process. it is through the movement of parent scales that we determine the resolution or non resolution of the chord movement.

resolving intervals (of parent scales)

up M2, M3, +4
Down m2, m3, 4th

non-resolving intervals

up m2, m3, 4th
down M2, M3, +4

In other words, by looking at the movement of the parent scales between chords we can determine if the chord movement is a resolution or non- resolution, Resolutions will always have a non-tonic inside choice followed by a tonic inside choice, and non-resolutions will have the opposite (non-tonic moving to tonic)

in the case of one or more resolutions or non-resolutions in a row, we will have "pivot chords" where the macrodiatonic relationship to the preceding chord is different from that of the following chord, here, we can decide whether to anticipate the harmonic change or wait for the chord to do it for us.

With all of this stuff and more put together, Jim has created these worksheets that show all of the chords that any chord can resolve to at any time. I know it sounds a little crazy and new-agey and all that, but I really dig it and I haven't really found any flaws in his ideas so far, in fact, I use them all of the time and in most cases agree with them.

[Reg]

hey Tim... doesn't sound crazy, sound pretty straight ahead. That's basically how modal interchange works. It's not a modulation, the analysis still relates to the original.... there are always different choices as to what the original or tonal center of references is and that choice gives many choices or directions for the analysis to go, which opens doors for improvisation or simply basic comping for jazz players. The only downside is sometimes the most logical choice, or choice decided upon by his method of determining pitch resolutions, or at least implied resolutions and function, is not what is used many times... But I like the concept, hell isn't that what we do already. How else would someone hear/see it. I remember having to explain how any chord can resolve to any other chord, and show different methods of why... Reg

[JonnyPac]

Thanks Tim! I'm diggin it. Now can you throw up some examples of chord pairs that fit this method? I see the variable tone idea as very valid. So many players overlook the tones that are not in the chord symbol or fit their "hip" chord-scale sub/re-harm. Just because Aeolian isn't jazzy, doesn't mean there is no context that it fits perfectly. Heck, there are hip uses of Aeolian in jazz, but we just have to be willing to find them. Andrew Hill is a great composer who uses it heavily. I like just about every standard scale and I feel it is totally reliant on the pairing of chords that makes the music interesting.

[timscarey]

So,

I guess the idea is that any pairing of any chords fit the method, diatonic or not, I agree with reg that the given "inside choice" is not always what people play, and thats cool, hence the name inside "choice"

the scale choice aspect of it aims at finding continuity amidst non-diatonic (chord symbol style) harmonic progressions...

Cm7 (aeolean variable tone A/Ab) - Abm6 (melodic minor, variable tone G/Gb going in, Gb dorian going out "pivot chord")

AMaj7 - (lydian variable tone D/D# - Cm7/Bb ( C Phrygadorian Variable tone A/Ab conversion tone option D/Db)

F#Maj7 - (Lydian variable tone B/B#) - Fm7 (Pivot Db coming in D coming out)

Now, in this progression the oinly tonic chord scales are the Cm7 chords and the Fm7 as the pivot chord, using parent scale analysis , we would find

Eb Gb E Ab C# Ab/Eb

following the parent scale resolution intervals we get...

Non-resolution(NR), NR, R, NR, R, and a resolution back to Cm7 as it is a non-tonic chord moving to a tonic chord in the same key.

using this we can choose where to place resolutions and non-resolutions and create what I call a modal resolution template and choose where in our forms to build or release tension. or you can use it just to mess around with different chord progressions and try to make them musical using rhythm and melody.

A conclusion that I might draw from the analysis is that a melody "in c minor" might suit this well, or I might look at this whole passage as being "in c minor" for the purpose of creating a solo that sounds like a melody rather than me just doing a bunch of scale s and arpeggios (which I tend to do, ha ha ha)

[paynow]

So,

Ex. Fm7 (Variable tone = D or Db) next to DMaj7 (Variable tone G or G#)

I'm not sure if I understand this. What do you mean by variable tone? Interesting thread.

[timscarey]

I'm not sure if I understand this. What do you mean by variable tone? Interesting thread.

so, in a 7 note "f minor scale" you get the option of either Db (F aeolean) or D (F dorian)

the 7 note "D Major scale" can use either G (D ionian) or G# (D lydian)

the "inside choice" would be the choice that the other chord has in common in it's scale.

D scale has a D, F scale has a G, in this case as in many others we rely on enharmonics to help us, we use the G and not the Ab (G#) because of it's spelling in other words, a G is a G is a G.

in this case, if this were a 2 chord vamp, the D would be heard as the tonic as it implies a "tonic inside choice scale," the F uses Dorian which is non-tonic for it's chord type thus giving the F chord a non-tonic function.

but again, this is from chapter 21, there is a bunch of lead in stuff like vocab words and some assumptions about jazz notation.

[JonnyPac]

Thanks for all of this, Tim. It's great. It's exactly how I hear it...

[paynow]

so, in a 7 note "f minor scale" you get the option of either Db (F aeolean) or D (F dorian)

the 7 note "D Major scale" can use either G (D ionian) or G# (D lydian)

the "inside choice" would be the choice that the other chord has in common in it's scale.

D scale has a D, F scale has a G, in this case as in many others we rely on enharmonics to help us, we use the G and not the Ab (G#) because of it's spelling in other words, a G is a G is a G.

in this case, if this were a 2 chord vamp, the D would be heard as the tonic as it implies a "tonic inside choice scale," the F uses Dorian which is non-tonic for it's chord type thus giving the F chord a non-tonic function.

but again, this is from chapter 21, there is a bunch of lead in stuff like vocab words and some assumptions about jazz notation.

Thanks Tim. Good info. I appreciate the clarification. I like it; interesting approach.

[JonnyPac]

Tim, wanna give us a quick rundown on the book? Page count, readable by layman, "school of thought", jazz era bias, linear vs vertical bias, etc. I'm interested, $40 shipped is kinda risky for a buy without info, IMO.

[timscarey]

Tim, wanna give us a quick rundown on the book? Page count, readable by layman, "school of thought", jazz era bias, linear vs vertical bias, etc. I'm interested, $40 shipped is kinda risky for a buy without info, IMO.

Sure,

It's 308 pages, to get into it you have to have a pretty good understanding of the modes, and how to build chords from chord symbols.

It is the theory text for 2nd and 3rd year jazz theory at Cornish College of the arts, it focuses on chord function, spelling chords, arranging for 4 parts, voice leading etc, for the first 7 chapters, then gets into all different kinds of scales for another 7, there is a section on pentatonic scales, slash chords, Melody, cadences, and about 3 chapters on "the theory of modal resolution" which is the truly unique thing about this book.

it starts with an assumption that there are 3 harmonic languages Tonal, Modal, and Blues, each has different characteristics and are dealt with separately.

This book is extremely to the point and pretty dry in terms of inspiration (it's not a composition text) he does use examples from standards and a lot of lesser known tunes by our favorite composers. There are not to many "assignments" in the book so the student has to either be pretty self motivated or be taking the class.

it is both linear and vertical in different sections.

The book is still being written (the one I have now is the 3rd edition I've had, probably the 10th so far) it changes from time to time (like the addition of the phrygian tonic idea and other things) but the fundamentals have been the same for like 25 years, be prepared to sit at the piano with some staff paper if you really want to get the most from it, it's required for a lot of the voice leading stuff. The scale stuff and modal stuff would translate right to the guitar though.

I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in theory, it is very interesting and in my opinion, in the cutting edge of jazz theory, his big band has like 5 CD's out too look for the Jim Knapp Orchestra.

[JonnyPac]

Awesome. Thanks. Sounds really good-- That's cool he's revising it. Mark Levine should follow suit. I'm always revising my wee 90 page guitar book based on new info and better terms, etc. I learn a lot right here with you guys. Thanks again!

Keep the discussion going. These seems like a very overlooked aspect of playing "inside" jazz; which IMO, has a lot to be explored still.

[brwnhornet59]

It is awesome seeing different facets of how we hear things and why they are what they are. The cool thing is that there are many correct paths leading to the same answer. Knowledge is power.

[paynow]

Here's a link to the Jazz Harmony book at Knapp's site:

Jim Knapp Music: Books

[JonnyPac]

Some more thoughts on this...

When this kind of "inside" harmony is worked with it seems to me that "skyscraper" tertian/quartal harmony happens. It's like the beautiful sounds of the impressionist composers happening in real time... They are what I consider the high point of Western harmony. That's my bias. Many jazz greats were inspired by them; many of my favorites.

On the other hand, I tend to steer away from inside/outside theories and the liberal use of superimposed harmony because it doesn't "stack" like the more cohesive approaches. Instead of a skyscraper we get one story houses mashed into each other!

Anyhoo, these are just outright opinions. I respect others and know damn well that they "work". There are many right answers in art.

[timscarey]

Some more thoughts on this...

When this kind of "inside" harmony is worked with it seems to me that "skyscraper" tertian/quartal harmony happens. It's like the beautiful sounds of the impressionist composers happening in real time... They are what I consider the high point of Western harmony. That's my bias. Many jazz greats were inspired by them; many of my favorites.

On the other hand, I tend to steer away from inside/outside theories and the liberal use of superimposed harmony because it doesn't "stack" like the more cohesive approaches. Instead of a skyscraper we get one story houses mashed into each other!

Anyhoo, these are just outright opinions. I respect others and know damn well that they "work". There are many right answers in art.

Not sure that I totally follow you on this.....

Are you comparing harmonic ideas based on the diatonic/m.m systems to harmonies outside of those systems, or something different. some examples might help.

[JonnyPac]

I'm thinking like this... A solid bassline outlining the roots and using logical connections; a well-constructed chord voicing (or series); and a melody that tops it off... Bottom to top interest and cohesion.

Whereas a lot of jazz theory/performers are cool with a nondescript bassline with lots of outside notes (and careless intonation), a series of decent chords; and a melody that implies a different chord 50% of the time. The improvised melody outline is fighting the underlying chord which is built on an unstable bass... The fabric is loose, and the melody does not always top off the chord, it challenges it.

IMHO!

There is some great music that is build from a looser fabric... Miles 2nd Quintet, Dolphy, Trane Quartet, Andrew Hill. Still flippin' awesome. It all depends on the group in the long run.

[timscarey]

I hear ya.

And I agree that it depends on who is playing the music. One thing that is certain is that the amount of improvisation in a given "jazz music" varies dramatically.

I tend to heir on the side of composition and soloing on a harmonic structure of some kind, I am a big fan of challenging grooves and rhythmic forms (but that just me)

It sounds like we are two people looking for new frontiers in the language of jazz chord symbol harmony, but not all jazz musicians have a desire to do that and in my experience, most young players want to get as far away from that as possible.

This honestly (and i'm going to sound like a hater) makes me wonder about the real motivations of such players. Specifically people who would look down on a traditionally constructed jazz tune or performance as something outdated or irrelevant, or players who love to play free and call it jazz because it's all improvised. I mean, It really doesn't bother me because it's all music, whatever the motivation, but I suspect (given the output) that in more than a few cases there is some other motivating factor to this music other than the music itself, like (and im going to sound like a total douche) "if you don't like this, you're just not as hip as the rest of us" when how most people really feel is "I don't like this because there is no structure, it's frantic, and completely unpredictable" or "I like this because I'm supposed to like it"

don't get me wrong, I play free in two of my jazz groups, and enjoy it. I don't in my own group, and have many good friends who do all the time and who are wonderfully talented musicians who I respect very much. I'm just playing devils advocate for the sake of discussion.

[JonnyPac]

I'm there as well. Not a hater, just a bit of a skeptic. Peoples values are all over the place. Good post, my friend. Balls out.

I didn't grow up on jazz or atonal 20th century classical music pumped into my ears, so I have good old "rock" sensibilities, as it were. lol. I was really into songwriting and singing while strumming for my first 10 years on guitar. I sang some standards too. Thinking as a vocalist led me to play similar notes while soloing on guitar, jazz or otherwise. Some blusy stuff, but mostly the "right" notes that vocalists often use. Its hard as hell to accurately sing an "outside" line against a clear chord.

As a kid I always liked Fantasia's soundtrack, Rimsky-Korsakov's Scheherazade, and the French Impressionists. I also used to watch/listen to Philp Glass's musical works on Koyaanisqatsi over and over between 4-7 years old. Strange... I know my arpeggios!! All of this kind of set a standard for my harmonic expectations. ...along with a good dose of the Beatles.

When I got into jazz, it was Charlie Christian, Bird, and Miles (late 1950's) that had me hooked. This was exciting music because of many reasons... Still is! It mirrored the things I dug in Bach, Debussy and blended it with the groove and sort song forms in pop. The idea that it was improvised and still sounded good was the real kicker! If it was improvised and sounded "out" I might not have even been impressed at all. That's a funny thought.

Shocking music is never on my plate. From loud metal to free jazz to prepared piano; I'd rather practice hackysack in my lawn. Seriously, I can kick some badass freestyle footbag. That's a tough act to follow.

Nothing wrong with beauty. Dolphin Dance (Hancock), Gaslight (Duke Pearson), Time Remembered, Very Early (Evans), Penelope (Shorter), Silver's Serenade (Silver) and some of the most beautiful tunes ever, IMHO. They are also in my personal "Goldilocks" area of what makes really good jazz...

That said, to me, some fusion and free jazz sounds like frustration being expressed. Musical/artistic frustration... trying to find something because everything has been done before... It mirrors some modern art; splatters, blank canvases, or the wacky stuff in big building lobbies. Perhaps I don't "get" it, but I've been spoon-fed lots being a "jazz guitarist" and an art gallery director.

...all of this and reading a lot (in layman's) books on music, brain science, evolutionary psychology, cosmology (yay Carl Sagan!), metaphysical naturalism and such has me thinking about things in a new light. Music is brain candy... why not make it sweet.

[JonnyPac]

I tend to heir on the side of composition and soloing on a harmonic structure of some kind, I am a big fan of challenging grooves and rhythmic forms (but that just me)

You'll love this.

[brwnhornet59]

Loved the rhythm's. Great build's. But for some reason it left me unsatisfied. I dig minimalism. Philip Glass, Brian Eno. Certain Fripp, etc.. I am not sure why it did not take me over the top. I will give it a few more whirl's!!

[JonnyPac]

Try this one too. More in 7. Piano solo and vocals... mmm

[brwnhornet59]

I liked this one much more. Cool aeolian grove goin on.

[JonnyPac]

I'm really settling into the "inside choice" default harmony. I taught a lesson to a group yesterday on it and it went over well. Thanks again for the posts; more are welcome.