-
A bebop scale is an eight note scale-- that is to say a seven note scale with one added note. The note is added not for melodic or harmonic reasons, but for rhythmic reasons.
The bebop dominant scale is the mixolydian scale with an added note:
1 2 3 4 5 6 b7 7 1...
Notice the added note is the natural seventh, which is the least harmonically agreeable note possible on a dominant seventh. However, the rhythm created by the addition is fascinating. All chord tones land on downbeats, and all non-chord tones land on upbeats, like so:
1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 1...
1 2 3 4 5 6 b7 7 1...
When you consider how short the downbeat lasts in swing eighths, it's easy to see how that added dissonant note sounds good in context.
You can build a bebop scale for other chords, too.
Major sixth:
1 2 3 4 5 #5 6 7 1...
Minor seventh:
1 2 b3 4 5 6 b7 7 1...
Half-diminished:
1 2* b3 4 b5 b6 b7 7 1...
*natural 2 derived from melodic minor
Diminished:
...
Interestingly the diminished octatonic scales are already bebop scales as far as chord tones go. Look:
1 b2 b3 b4 b5 5 bb7 b7 1...
1 2 b3 4 b5 b6 bb7 7 1...
Though it lacks the cool bebop scale sound, they are, strictly speaking, bebop scales. Perhaps it's the 3 or 4 note chromatic run found in most bebop scale that give them their signature sound.
Isn't that cool?
-
11-12-2011 11:03 PM
-
Most of they guys who originally played that stuff weren't thinking in terms of scales, they were thinking in terms of chord tones and extensions or alterations with passing tones rather than a "bebop scale'.
Now that's cool!
-
Originally Posted by monk
Most of those guys playing that stuff also didn't call the scales they were playing a 'bebop" scale either.
Maybe I'm old fashioned being that I studied music in college back in the late 70's and I suspect Monk feels as I do about these 'scales'.
Two terms I never heard mentioned. Drop 2 and Bebop scales. Don't spend too much time on these. Look at it for what they are and move on. A 7 note scale with a chromatic passing tone. Lot's of other things to learn.
-
So if it wasn't discussed in colleges in the 70s then we shouldn't "spend too much time" on it?
-
Drop 2 voicings are great, very practical.
Bebop scales don't give much help with actual bebop language, but I can understand the perks of having them memorized as they do allow you to fulfill the "chord tones on downbeats" idea in 8th note lines. I used to hate on bebop scales, but now I think they have their place, it's just important to know what they are and what they aren't.
-
Originally Posted by morroben
No, it was discussed as a scale with a chromatic passing tone. Now it's been given a "name" by acedemia in order to sell books.
NONE of the professors used the term "bebop" scale. Here are a few of th e professors that taught at the college I went to when I was there
Rufus Reed
Bucky Pizzareli
Dave Samuels
Chico Mendoza
Harry Leahey
Helen Miles
Thad Jones
There were others whose names I can't remember.
IT's funny that in the 70's long after be-bop had it's hay day most musicians were able to look at it for what it was. Now 30-40 years later (and many more years after bebops hay day) people are getting hung up on it like it's the do-all of jazz. It is still only a 7 note scale with a chromatic passing tone. Hell , even the pentatonic has a version (C D D# E F G A) which resembles the blues scale (A C D D# E G)
If that's all you want to spend your time working on that's fine. Just think that all the time you're devoting to over anylizing this 'bebop scale" concept could be better spent learning tunes or even more advanced concepts. But it's your time. Spend it how you like
As far as "drop" chords, It's a name somebody came up with to help identify a voicing . You're better served looing at how the notes stack up then calling it a "drop" something.
But honestly, its the 'bebop' scale thing where a lot of poeple get stuck at that gets me. There are so many scales that are more relevant it seems such a waste to spend too much time on just one.
-
Is it actually selling books? I'm not asking rhetorically.No, it was discussed as a scale with a chromatic passing tone. Now it's been given a "name" by acedemia in order to sell books.
I'm not understanding why simply giving the group of notes a name is unnerving to you. I suppose my only qualm with it would be if somebody were new to bebop and thought that simply practicing the "bebop scale" would make them sound like Bird. Otherwise, it's just a scale with interesting (to me) rhythmic implications.NONE of the professors used the term "bebop" scale. Here are a few of th e professors that taught at the college I went to when I was there
Rufus Reed
Bucky Pizzareli
Dave Samuels
Chico Mendoza
Harry Leahey
Helen Miles
Thad Jones
There were others whose names I can't remember.
I think the OP was just excited about it's potential uses. I didn't interpret the post as prioritizing this collection of pitches above anything else (like analyzing tunes, transcribing, working on time-feel, etc). There are a million things one could be working on at any point in time. If one is trying to play a lot of fast 8th note based lines, I can understand the merit of working on bebop scales - in addition to other things.IT's funny that in the 70's long after be-bop had it's hay day most musicians were able to look at it for what it was. Now 30-40 years later (and many more years after bebops hay day) people are getting hung up on it like it's the do-all of jazz. It is still only a 7 note scale with a chromatic passing tone. Hell , even the pentatonic has a version (C D D# E F G A) which resembles the blues scale (A C D D# E G)
If that's all you want to spend your time working on that's fine. Just think that all the time you're devoting to over anylizing this 'bebop scale" concept could be better spent learning tunes or even more advanced concepts. But it's your time. Spend it how you like
I've actually never practiced them myself - most of my vocabulary comes from transcription and my own experimentation. However, I struggle with faster tempos (relative to how I'd like to sound), and work on a variety of things to address the issue. This post's reminder about the usefulness of these pitch collections got me thinking maybe I'd devote a little bit of time to getting familiar with these scales.
I really don't understand this either. It's just a name, names are just ways we organize things. Drop 2 voicings are very useful, why you'd want to refrain from naming them that way makes me scratch my head a bit. This face seems appropriate:As far as "drop" chords, It's a name somebody came up with to help identify a voicing . You're better served looing at how the notes stack up then calling it a "drop" something.
I think the reason people give pitch collections or voicing-configurations names is because they are so commonly used and referred to that it becomes a convenience to have a short hand. You can say "drop 2 voicing" rather than having to say "a voicing that is like a closed voicing but has the second highest voice lowered by an octave" every time. Drop 2 voicings are so accessible on guitar, easy to organize and invert, and are a quick way to find a four note voicing with any possible note as the top note. They aren't a holy grail to harmony, sure, as the bebop scales have very little to do with mastering the bebop language, but that doesn't render them useless or unworthy of being categorized by a name.
-
Jake,
I found 3 books on the bebop scale doing a quick google search. Why is this one scale set out apart? What makes it more important then the others.
I've looke dthrough the solos in the CP Omnibook. In the examples I looked at I didn't see a lot of bebop scale going on. I did see a lot of arpeggios.
Was the bebop scale really Bird's scale of choice? Do you have example of Bird using this scale?
Ok, "Drop" Drop 2, Drop 3 , Drop 4 . There are more than just 4 ways to voice a major 7th. What notes did you drop to get 1537 or 1375? But I'll give you this one.
I really don't have anything agaist their having a name. It is a peeve of mine that so much emphasis is placed on them as if this is all you need.
-
The problem here is not with the specific naming of the scale, but with the obsession with SCALES in the first place. It's pointing the analytical microscope in the wrong place.
It all started with the modal jazz explosion in the early 60s. People started focusing on chord-scales, rather than chord progressions, because it opened up so much new stuff, new ways of composing and playing. It was "cool" in more ways than one.
The problem comes when trying to apply those concepts (which have since become academic dogma, as mentioned) to pre-modal jazz, which IS all about progression: chord arpeggios, functions and voice-leading. Horizontal stuff running through the chords, not vertical stuff stacking up on each chord.
As JohnW400 says, if you look at what Bird (as arguably the archetypal bebopper) actually played, it's full of arpeggios. Most of his melodies were arpeggios. Of course, he'd extend those to b9s a lot of the time, but there's no evidence he thought much about scales, in the modern sense. You don't see the altered scale; you don't see melodic minor much. You do see what looks like harmonic minor occasionally, or dim7 arpeggios (but not diminished scales AFAIK).
Chord changes were simply too fast for that - everything was about planning lines that leapt from chord tone to chord tone, spelling out the changes (because that was Bird's main interest at least). And also working out arps for interesting passing chords and subs.
It was Coltrane who really got into the altered scale and the kind of dense harmonies that produced.
Theorists like the altered scale because of its intriguing property of "no avoid notes" (which it shares with the diminished scale, lydian dominant, and lydian and dorian modes). It means a pianist can use as many fingers as he can get on to the keyboard and make a chord with any or all of the notes in the scale if he wants
. For soloists, avoid notes are not really an issue, because they're fine in passing in melodies (Bird used them all the time). But of course, if a pianist is playing an altered chord, the soloist needs to go with it - or at least be aware of it.
And the other issue about bebop scales is of course the whole narrow-minded idea of playing scale runs in 8th notes! That's a practice exercise (and not a great one at that), not an improvisation strategy! If anything is going to encourage a soloist to play scale runs in 8th notes (as if enough beginners don't do that already), it ought to be outlawed!
-
I don't think it is at all set apart. In fact, even on this forum, there is probably about 10x as much discussion about melodic minor (and it's modes) as well as the major-scale-based modes then there is about the bebop scale. I don't even recall many threads on it. Originally Posted by JohnW400
Definitely not, I agree. I have transcribed a handful of Bird solos, and work with the omnibook every now and again, and I agree, he didn't use the "bebop scale" and certainly wasn't thinking of the bebop scale.I've looke dthrough the solos in the CP Omnibook. In the examples I looked at I didn't see a lot of bebop scale going on. I did see a lot of arpeggios.
But that specific point, that we both agree on, runs counter to neither anything I wrote in my previous post, or anything in the content of the original post.
Definitely. So with all of those seemingly infinite possibilities, organizing a handful of useful options seems like a great idea to me!There are more than just 4 ways to voice a major 7th.
Getting to JonR's post, I'd agree that chord scales often get way too much focus in place of other things. But no claim of prioritization has been made in this thread, just observations about a pitch collection. There was no hierarchy given in relation to other areas of study. The only reason I've bothered replying in this specific thread is because I actually thought DK's post was kind of interesting and useful, and felt a little bad for him to get ganged up on.I really don't have anything agaist their having a name. It is a peeve of mine that so much emphasis is placed on them as if this is all you need.
Remember, nobody was saying "play these scales and you will sound like a bebop master." If somebody wrote that, I'd gladly cyber beat them to a virtual pulp. The original post was simply "here is a scale with rhythmic applications. Neat, huh?" To which I'd agree..."yes, neat."
-
Is it? I see no obsession.The problem here is not with the specific naming of the scale, but with the obsession with SCALES in the first place.
Agreed completely.The problem comes when trying to apply those concepts (which have since become academic dogma, as mentioned) to pre-modal jazz, which IS all about progression: chord arpeggios, functions and voice-leading. Horizontal stuff running through the chords, not vertical stuff stacking up on each chord.
Agreed completely.As JohnW400 says, if you look at what Bird (as arguably the archetypal bebopper) actually played, it's full of arpeggios. Most of his melodies were arpeggios. Of course, he'd extend those to b9s a lot of the time, but there's no evidence he thought much about scales, in the modern sense. You don't see the altered scale; you don't see melodic minor much. You do see what looks like harmonic minor occasionally, or dim7 arpeggios (but not diminished scales AFAIK).
Chord changes were simply too fast for that - everything was about planning lines that leapt from chord tone to chord tone, spelling out the changes (because that was Bird's main interest at least). And also working out arps for interesting passing chords and subs.
What I find interesting about the bebop scale is that it has the potential to turn a scalar 8th note line into a line that has chord tones on downbeats and passing scale tones or chromatic passing notes on upbeats. I agree that scales up and down (in any rhythm) is not something to be encouraged, however, consistent 8th note lines have their place in jazz. At a very fast tempo, sometimes I think we need something simple and straight forward to simply get us through the chord change.And the other issue about bebop scales is of course the whole narrow-minded idea of playing scale runs in 8th notes! That's a practice exercise (and not a great one at that), not an improvisation strategy! If anything is going to encourage a soloist to play scale runs in 8th notes (as if enough beginners don't do that already), it ought to be outlawed!
I'm not an advocate of the bebop scale or anything like that - like I've said, I've never even practiced it. I just find the idea interesting, and I liked the original post.
I agree completely that scales are often over prioritized, but that doesn't at all make them useless or unworthy of any attention.
-
As the original respondant to the OP, I was simply trying to point out as concisely as possible that the swing and bebop players did not approach music in terms of scales.
However, one would have to be living in a cave or on a desert island to be unaware of the emphasis that is placed on scales in academia, in guitar magazines and online. One only has to listen to novice players trying to solo in high school jazz bands, college recitals or even on gigs to realize that scales as an "end all, be all" solution to the problems of soloing has become pervasive in the extreme.
Anyone who teaches, as I do, has had students asking to learn "THE JAZZ SCALE". This is usually prefaced with "I know the blues scale, now I want to learn....". I actually had a student accuse me of withholding information when I told him that there's no such thing because he saw a reference to the BEBOP SCALE online or in a magazine.
We live in a time, and have for some time, when people want the quick fix, the hot and tasty drive-through answer to all their desires and problems and they want it NOW. I will try to help people understand that it does not exist and never did as gently or as firmly as necessary with no apologies.
-
I wish the scales just simply had different names. Like "octonic approach scales" rather than "bebop scales," because I agree that they have barely any relevance to actual bebop music.
-
Maybe not here. And maybe I was exaggerating... Originally Posted by JakeAcci
But one does see talk about scales all over the place.
Indeed. That's their appeal. They make a lot of theoretical sense - and they will certainly make scalar 8th note runs easier to handle, and fit better, at least on any one particular chord. Originally Posted by JakeAcci
Well, IMO that in itself is the wrong way to think. "What can I play that's going to get me through these changes?" Originally Posted by JakeAcci
It's treating music like an assault course, something difficult that one has to get through as quickly as possible and emerge at the other end unscathed. Phew, made it!
It's certainly an attitude one finds in jazz schools (in my experience): "aaagh it's my turn to play, I've got to fill this space somehow!" (I guess we've all been there and done that...
)
Encouraging short cuts or "escape strategies" - like bebop scales, or some other kind of "solution" - isn't music.
It's as if one is in a conversation, and one can't think of anything to say (maybe the topic is over one's head), and someone comes up and hands you a piece of paper with some words on: "here you go, just say this: it doesn't mean anything, but is going to help you take your turn in making some kind of sound, and feel like you're part of it." (And of course if everyone else in the same conversation is also reading garbage off a piece of paper, then everyone's happy! It sounds like we're all talking and isn't that the point? )
I think what's happened to cause this situation is a body of knowledge known as "jazz theory" has built up from the analysis of old jazz recordings (and maybe just the odd piece of advice from actual jazz musicians). Here are the rules that they seem to be following: they are playing these scales over these chords. So if you follow these rules you will sound like a jazz musician!
And on some level that's true. It sounds sort of like jazz, superficially.
Like, if you play a 12-bar chord sequence and noodle around on the minor pentatonic, you are "playing blues". Well, yes, it kind of sounds like you are. You're making a sort of bluesy sound anyway.
The notion of "ideas" tends to get forgotten about (melody, rhythm, motivic development, etc) - probably because it's hard to teach, but also because learners themselves want short cuts. All some of them want to do is sound sort of like jazz musicians. "Hey look, I'm up here noodling on a saxophone! And not actually playing any wrong notes! Success!" They're happy, the teachers get paid: what's not to like?
True enough. I'm only trying to tip the bias the other way. Originally Posted by JakeAcci
Rant over...
-
Wow! That's a lot of replies. I have to agree, bebop scales are poorly named.
I like "approach scales", Jake.
However, in terms of horizontal and vertical (arpeggios and scales respectively) approach scales are diagonal, because they are scales that strongly imply chord tones through rhythm.
On the question of whether or not you should practice these, well, why not? It isn't hard to take a major scale and add a specific passing tone. You can use the approach scales anywhere you'd use any other scale. Of course major and melodic minor based modes are important, but outside of those is a cornucopia of different sounds. I'm not undermining the importance of arpeggio practice either!
Thanks everyone. I just got back from a great gig, so I'm in a great mood.
-
Very true - the best way to think of them, IMO. Originally Posted by =DK=
I agree. Originally Posted by =DK=
After all, arpeggio practice could easily be combined with a "bebop scale" approach - if you make the arpeggio quarter notes. (In both directions and starting on different chord tones, of course. And not worrying too much about where the passing note comes...*)
Knowledge of scales is crucial, and that only comes through practice. The important thing is always to tie the scales to chords of some kind. On guitar, that's quite easy, because you can build scales around chord shapes, or look for chord shapes in scale patterns. (as in the CAGED system)
But the other important thing is to think melodically and rhythmically for improvisation, and not worry about filling every bar with all the notes you know.
As Bird is supposed to have said: "Learn all your scales. Then forget em all and just play."
Ie, you have to know them well enough not to have to think about them, so you can think about more important stuff.
Good for you. I just got back from a crap gig (well, 2 nights ago), so I'm in a foul mood! Originally Posted by =DK=
Thanks everyone. I just got back from a great gig, so I'm in a great mood.
(Seriously, those don't really bother me. They just booked the wrong band; we played fine.)
* BTW, I forgot to mention (in my downer on bebops in general ) that the "bebop dorian" scale (designed for m7s) has a M3 as passing note, not maj7. Not that the one you list wouldn't work as well (or better). I'm just repeating what I read.
-
I tend to think of the melodic minor as a set of 7 scales and not just one. (As I do with any standard 7 note scale system. Major, harmonic, etc) Originally Posted by JakeAcci
Another thing not that unrelated is that I have always 'preached' on this forum that it is more important to learn how it sounds. I can "invent" a scale based on what type of sound I want.
Start with your basic 4 note arp (1357) and add the other three ingredients (2 4 6 ). Take a 13 #11 b9. 1 3 5 b7 b9 #11 13. Now arrange them into a scalelike order 1 b9 3 #11 5 13 b7 . There's your scale
Basic ingredient (1357)
spice (246)
More possibilities here to work on than just add a chromatic passing tone.
-
Huh, a M3? Let's see: Originally Posted by JonR
* BTW, I forgot to mention (in my downer on bebops in general ) that the "bebop dorian" scale (designed for m7s) has a M3 as passing note, not maj7. Not that the one you list wouldn't work as well (or better). I'm just repeating what I read.
1 2 b3 3 4 5 6 b7 1...
Okay, I see that 4 6 1 b3 spells a dominant chord. Oh, actually this is just a mode of the bebop dominant scale. Is that where they got the scale from?
I just played it. It sounded cool to my ears, but it didn't sound very "dorian". It sounded dominant.
-
Don't know what the fuss is all about. In my transcribing I see "bebop" scale usage all the time, check out any Stitt, early Rollins, Dexter and yes, Bird. I see arp fragment (often 4 notes) followed by the descending linked scale with a passing note. Bebop scales are not a "lazy" way out, nor are they going to make you think less about arpeggios, after all, they embellish arpeggios perfectly, that's what is cool about them! Old schoolers make a strong point that you don't outline the harmony as well when thinking scales, and of course they might be right, but bebop scales can serve as good training wheels (they do get you used to hearing chord tones on down beats).
Of course, the student needs to work through arp/scale patterns in order to start to identify the language of jazz on a basic level, but in time they will tire from playing scales or patterns, by which time hopefully they will hear their way out (by playing the melodies they will start to hear in their minds). Is time wasted in learning this way? Absolutely! Without learning it off the street like the old timers did, the new student faces a confusing array of misinformation about how to learn Jazz. The unsuspecting student will unfortunately be waylaid in perhaps hundreds of ways, with so many "experts" out there insisting they have the only key to the inner sanctum, who could blame them? They're as mistrusting of those who shout "CST is bullsh*t" as those peddling "1054 New modes for the Jazz Virtuouso", or "101 licks you MUST know".....
So yeah, tunes, chords/inversions, arps, subs and the usual scales with and without the various passing notes. Stick to those for 3 or 4 years and ignore almost everything else and eventually your ears will teach you the rest. Just sayin', there are worse traps out there than Bebop scales.....
-
the mixo bebop (say for G7) is commonly used against the ii chord (Dm). The 6th and 11th are very "Dorian" sounding, you'll hear it... Originally Posted by =DK=
-
Like I said, I'm only reporting what I read, Originally Posted by =DK=
Specifically, Mark Levine's Jazz Theory Book lists the following bebop scales (passing notes in bold):
Bebop dominant: 1 2 3 4 5 6 b7 7
Bebop dorian: 1 2 b3 3 4 5 6 b7
Bebop major: 1 2 3 4 5 #5 6 7
Bebop melodic minor: 1 2 b3 4 5 #5 6 7
I kind of agree bebop dorian sounds dominant. It's not so much the M3 in the scale (IMO) as the 4th and major 6th that get accents. If the scale is played on a ii chord, the 4th and 6th are the root and 3rd of the V (G and B on a Dm7 chord). It becomes like an anticipation of the V, esp when the other two accented notes are D and F! That's a G7 arpeggio!
Moreover, bebop dorian is what you get when you combine major and minor pent, which is a common strategy in rock'n'roll scales on major or dom7 chords. IOW, it sounds (to me) more like mixolydian with a passing b3 than dorian with a passing M3.
In this case, D "bebop dorian" would be used on D7. (Even tho its accented notes are a G7 arp. Over a D7 chord, we hear the F as an approach to the F# chord tone. When the G note is used, it tends to move to F and then back to F#. You hear this in Chuck Berry.)
It may be significant that none of the examples Levine gives from jazz recordings are of bebop dorian. All are bebop dominant, except for a lone bebop major example (from Coltrane). As a writer who (rightly) sets a lot of store by what jazz musicians actually did (his book is full of recorded examples to support his theories), it's a little odd he couldn't find an example of bebop dorian. One's tempted to ask: what makes him think it exists at all? (It's not good theory to say a concept ought to exist, even if has a logical appeal. It has to be based on actual practice.)
Maybe the examples he found were all played over dominant chords - as it commonly would be in R&B or country - which rather spoils the theory! It's a bit messy to have two kinds of bebop dominant scale... one might start thinking that in fact the old players added chromatic notes at random, rather then systematically... (For a theorist, such an idea does not compute .)
-
In his 1985 book, How To Play Bebop: The Bebop Scale and Other Scales in Common Use, David Baker (who is generally credited with introducing the term "bebop scale" to academia and the world at large) only gave two scales.
The first scale was Bebop Dominant which was to be applied to a ii7, V7 and viim7b5 in a key, In other words, the C dominant bebop scale (C-D-E-F-G-A-Bb-B-C) was to be played over Gm7, C7 and Em7b5 in the key of F.
The second scale, Bebop Major was to played over the I chord in a key, i.e. F-G-A-Bb-C-C#-D-E-F for F major.
Baker never mentioned a Bebop Dorian Scale. That name was tacked on to the fifth mode of the Bebop Dominant Scale at a later time, no doubt due to Baker's use of the Bebop Dominant in a ii7-V7 situation.
The sixth mode of the Bebop Major (1-2-b3-4-5-b6-b7-7-1) actually sounds good over the relative minor 7 with all the chord tones falling on downbeats but lacks the major 6 associated with the dorian mode.
-
...and the Bebop Natural Minor: 1 2 b3 4 5 b6 b7 7... Originally Posted by JonR
Last edited by whatswisdom; 11-14-2011 at 11:06 PM.
-
I still like to think of them as embellished arpeggios more than being scales. Though they are scales per se, they are scales that strongly imply the chord that the scale revolves around. The idea of the bebop scale having modes is interesting, but giving the scale modes is treating it as a scale, and not as an imbellished arpeggio, as it's function dictates.
I thought of something interesting. The root doesn't have to be included in the emphasized tones. So here are III/I Approach Scales for Major and Dominant.
3 4 5 6 7 1 9 b3 3...
3 4 5 6 b7 1 9 b3 3...
If you like giving everything a name, I suppose you could call the first one Bebop Phrygian, and the second one Bebop Locrian.
The biggest problem with creating approach scales comes when two of the chord tones are a half step apart. If I wanted an approach scale for the Major 7th chord, there's no note between 7 and 1 to land on the upbeat.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ? 1...
-
I think learning lines using that passing tone in them will get it into your muscle memory - no use cluttering up your mind with trying to look at it as a separate entity than anything else you would do when going for a vanilla unaltered dominant seventh line.
I've been dabbling with this "bebop scale" concept, and to me, it is plain old mixolydian, because the extra tone sounds like a passing tone. It is. It is not an octatonic scale - not to my ears at least. It is like using any other passing tone in a mixolydian situation. In my mind I categorize and associate the concept with the rest of my vanilla dominant sounds - you know, stuff you would play for example on the rhythm changes bridge if you want to stay inside(no altered/diminished, just the plain sound of the chord).
I'm a firm believer in learning lines first, and then find out what scales are involved. Then you already have the concept in your ear so you have a clue what the theory is trying to describe. The bebop scale concept can sound very elegant - but I think it needs to be approached as a component of a line, otherwise it will sound like an exercise.
I think Sheryl Bailey has a video at truefire or mikes master classes or something(Don't remember exactly where at the moment) on how to get that bebop flavor on dominant 7ths. She had a lesson like that at the old Jimmy Bruno site which was straight to the point. She would use the passing tone together with things you would usually play in a situation like that, using diatonic arpeggio substitutions to get upper structures like the m7b5, and the m7. She had it all condensed into what she called "the microcosmic bebop line" - one line encompassing all the most used concepts that define the dom7th bebop sound.
Personally, I am on the lookout for lines using the bebop scale and the related concept. I can play altered, pentatonic, wholetone, diminshed etc on those dom7ths, but I have so little vocabulary on the basic vanilla sound.
I think a lot of students lack in this area. Emily Remler said that in the beginning, she had trouble hearing the basic mixolydian, and that the lydian dominant opened many doors for her. That's also an important component of the bebop sounds. I think things start to happen when all these components are internalized to make a composite sound/scale. Isolated they will sound forced, but when assimilated into the vocabulary, it becomes music.
I'll be following this thread, because vanilla bebop sounds is just what I need in my playing right now. Great thread!
Reply With Quote
Playing live and getting the best sound from the...
Today, 02:08 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos