-
Say you have an A minor chord as the ii. Generally speaking, and I understand context changes things, what scale would be played over it? Modal? Straight minor scale?
Remember you are talking to a beginner here.
Thanks!
-
05-14-2013 09:20 PM
-
Scales go over a certain chord if the scale contains the notes within the chord. It's as simple as that.
A minor seventh chord contains a root, minor third, perfect fifth, and minor seventh. So to find an appropriate scale just add some kind of second (9th), some kind of fourth (11th), and some kind of sixth (13th).
Adding the major 2nd/9th, perfect 4th/11th, and major 6th/13th gives you Dorian.
Adding the major 2nd/9th, perfect 4th/11th, and MINOR 6th/13th gives you Aeolian/natural minor.
Adding the MINOR 2nd/9th, perfect 4th/11th, and MINOR 6th/13th gives you Phrygian.
If someone doesn't know the interval structure of the modes then they haven't really learned them yet.
Those are the minor 7th chord scales derived from the diatonic major scale, although there are others from melodic minor, harmonic minor, and harmonic major.
As you mentioned context, well if Amin7 is the ii chord in the key, then the natural scale choice would be the mode built from the same degree. Dorian is the second mode of the major scale, so any ii chord will fit dorian...in this case A dorian (second mode of G major).... "ii chord" and "dorian" are basically synonyms.
Before anyone else mentions it, I'll also say you actually don't need to worry about modes to play over tonal chord changes
Last edited by RyanM; 05-14-2013 at 10:10 PM.
-
If it's functioning as a ii, in a major cadence, Dorian's the inside choice...although I'm not a scale guy in that situation.
-
If you're calling it "ii", you presumably know it's in the key of G major. Therefore the scale is G major.
Originally Posted by barrymclark
You can call it "A dorian" on that specific chord if you like (because the chord will give the scale an "A-root" sound), but it's not really "A dorian mode". If it was A dorian mode, then you'd be calling it the "i" chord: A would be your keynote, not just the chord root.
Normally in a chord progression in G major you're not spending long enough on Am to give it its own modal identity - so there's no point thinking of it in those terms. Just think chord ones (A C E) with the other notes in the key (B D F# G) as passing tones. IMO, it doesn't get any simpler than that.
IOW, you DO begin from the chord tones (as primary choices), but overall you're thinking "G major scale" (context, IOW). You can use any pattern of that scale, but you should know where the Am chord tones are in each pattern.
Naturally that's beginner level! ("Inside" as Jeff says.) "Jazzier" options involve various chromatic alterations or passing notes - NOT alternative modal choices. (I mean, not if you're still calling it a "ii" chord, which implies a G major context.)
-
Jamie Aebersolds site has a "free" jazz aids booklet that can be printed out...
One or two pages covering the chord and what scale/scales to play over it...
Everyone should have a copy of this booklet....
time on the instrument...
-
Amin7? Think D7.
-
Conversely... Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
D7? Think Am7...
It's still a matter of context (G major key in this case).
Eg, "thinking D7" is not going to be ideal if the context is C major/A minor or F major. It works here because the OP is saying the Am7 is "ii" (and therefore presumably leading into a D7 as V).
-
I'd use this table, if you are going down the path of using "Chord Scale Theory" or "what-scale-over-chord" .
-
Thinking of D7 as a natural dominant then is a valid choice. But if you think in terms of the altered options for D7, it might sound out of place over the Am7 because the line will then tend to pull towards some kind of G chord. Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
D7 bebop would sound nice. D lydian dominant basically gives you A melodic minor which is totally game on that chord.
-
^^^ All true. I was just trying to be terse. Fortune cookie advice.
-
Thanks all!
-
What found interest is something I was reading on the Berklee website yesterday that relates to this thread. Basically saying CST is an Advanced Improv tool and student needs to be proficient in chord-tone soloing first. At GIT the Schroeder Improv classes (which is fantastic) uses similar approach you work on arpeggio based improv before moving to scale based. There is also a Hal Crook article on Berklee basically say same type thing that many jump to scale based improv too soon. Then the Jerry Bergonzi quote I use a lot "knowing the right scale will get you in the ballpark, but it doesn't get you on base". Whole lot of people saying generally the same thing. Get a solid foundation working with chord-tones before moving to scales.
Berklee Today | Berklee College of Music
-
This! Originally Posted by docbop
You may well find that chord-tones are plenty. You are allowed chromatic passing notes, so no note is ever ruled out. That makes chord-tone soloing much more open-ended than CST, which - wrongly approached - risks being prescriptive, too formulaic. (Imagine taking Guy Boden's chart seriously...
)
Overall, one needs to be aware of melody and chord function too. Even with chord tone soloing, there's the risk of not seeing the wood for the trees.
No doubt in good jazz teaching, that's underlined. It's too easy to pick up on these tips, formulas and rules, and think one has found short cuts. IOW, when talking about chord tones or CST, it ought to taken for granted we are in the business of building melodic/rhythmic phrases. We shouldn't confuse labels for the raw material with strategies for creating solos. CST is not a "method". Chord tones are not a "method". They are just ways of talking about the stuff we use to improvise with.Last edited by JonR; 05-18-2013 at 01:40 PM.
-
Use the notes in the Chord and use your ears or just play the Key scale of the progression or its relative scale. If your in GMaj you can play the G Major scale or the E Minor scale. You can raise the 7th note of the E minor to make it a harmonic scale.
-
its not that you play any particular scale over the ii chord
you make the 'changes' happen in your solo , (what are the 'changes' to the tune ?)
ie where is that ii chord going to next ? , if it was for ex Amin going to D7 (the V chord in G yeah ?)
you could bring out that 'change' by emphasising the move from note G (seventh of Amin)
down a fret to F# (third or D7) to make ii V change happen in your solo
or maybe note B (9th of Amin ) to C the seventh of D7 also making the 'change' happen
play around , find you're own little moves you like etc
get a looper , put in a ii V , or ii V I sequence and get control over those 3rds and sevenths
thats where its at I reckon
-
Check out this site. Originally Posted by barrymclark
Home
-
He said, to remember he's a beginner. This is completely NOT for a beginner. Over the scale or mode column it doesn't even DEFINE the terms. I'm sorry but this is the kind of stuff that upsets me, as a teacher. Not you GuyBoden, but in general. It's very important to define terminology, especially for beginners. If he's a beginner he's not going to know what an Lydian Augmented is, let alone lydian. He asked what to use on a ii chord. Keep it basic for the dude, OK?
Originally Posted by GuyBoden
I'd use this table, if you are going down the path of using "Chord Scale Theory" or "what-scale-over-chord" .
-
All that chord-scale business is mostly mumbo-jumbo anyway in my opinion. What I would term "obscurantism". Use your ears. Think about singing a melody. On another thread I was using the example of the holiday classic, The Christmas Song in the key of C. If you had to use that chart to determine what notes to play or how to sing that melody line "Chestnuts roasting on an open fire...", you would lose your mind.
Now just sing the notes of the melody. That was easy, wasn't it? But if it's too easy, pull out the chart.....
-
One of the better oversimplifications I developed (or someone told me): Usually, music, is in a key of the cord it begins with. In jazz it's in a key of chord it ends. However, in jazz the key can change, often during a song, like lots of pieces of music glued together.
So, the trick would be to find suitable chord, with enough chords from same key before it, and apply that one scale over whole segment, while managing whole tune not to sound segmented.
-
It'll work...won't sound particularly jazzy though. Originally Posted by Vladan
-
agreed, unlesss you take some care, to sound so. Phrasing, sound, rhytm, swing, ...
-
Those things are all very important...but if you're playing only diatonic notes over any dominant chords in that progression, well..
-
Oh, that, thanks for clarifying. I just gave beginer's answer to beginner's question. After finding safe notes by some theory, or rule, one's on own self to add Jazz to it. Not that that's all to it, but I think it's ok for starters.
-
I see what you're saying, but I really don't like a key center approach for beginners, as it still seems to dictate "play this OVER this." When applied like a beginner would, it's still a rock or pop mentality...eventually if you're going to play jazz you've got to play jazz.
CST has it's time and place--it's just another roadmap, one that a player should have available to them--there are definitely situations that it's the clearer map too. But it's a very "macro" way of looking at things-- and I think it's way easier for the jazz beginner to start micro--the melody, the chords themselves, guide tones, etc...
Reg always talks about "implications..." I think that's a really tough concept for jazz beginners...just because 6 chords fit squarely in a key doesn't mean that scale is the answer...how do you create tension? suggest movement? add color? I think when players come to jazz from somewhere else they get tripped up by harmony...they're used to a chord progression being more set in stone as opposed to being a representation of possible harmony.
-
Agreed, although I wouldn't call that the "micro" level. The melody and chords, at least, are pretty "macro". The key and the melody would be the biggest (and simplest) picture - IMO - which is why I'd suggest beginners start there. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Chord tones are the next level. Mostly they will reflect the key scale (and contain melody notes of course), but they highlight other (simple) melodic moves through the sequence (eg guide tones). Beginner improvisers need to play through a sequence using arpeggios only, getting used to 5th-root moves and 3rd-7th moves. (I'm talking traditional functional harmony here, of course...)
As you say, all this diatonic material is not very "jazzy", but it has to be a start for players not used to improvising at all, or who have been improvising purely in a rock-blues minor pent mode, without following changes.
"Getting jazzy", for me, doesn't mean CST (an unnecessary deviation IMO, for functional sequences anyway); it means chromaticism. Creating extra tension and movement by introducing "outside" notes. Thus is pretty simple to get into via approach notes (half-steps below chord tones), and transitional half-steps from chord to chord (eg b5 to root).
Non-functional sequences are where CST becomes useful and appropriate. IOW, jazz where one is not "following the changes", but treating each chord in isolation.
I'm not saying CST can't or shouldn't be applied in functional progressions, but I do think - from a beginner's perspective - it's better to look at it in the context of single chords, as in early modal "vamp" jazz; allowing the player to fully explore an entire scale on one chord, for as long as they like - finding all the ins and outs, the quality of each tone, extension and alteration in relation to the root.
What's discovered there may well be applicable when one returns to functional progressions and faster changes.
But in examining the latter to begin with (ie working with older standards) I think CST is too much information, and the information is organised in an unhelpful way. (If it resembles a "road map", as you say, it's one with too many irrelevant routes on it. In particular it omits the main highway: the melody. Draw the melody and guide tones on it - the links across the chords - I have less problem with it.)
Absolutely. Reg's perspective is a highly advanced one (at least it looks like that from where I am!). I think the more experience and understanding you have of jazz, the more alternative routes open up - and the more you actively search for them of course. You enter realms totally baffling to beginners. The "implications" an advanced player sees will go right over the heads of beginners. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Right, but that idea of a chord progression being flexible - open to reharmonization - is not one beginners need to deal with at the start. They need to have feet on firm ground, not shifting ground. The central notion (seems to me) is the idea of movement through a progression: governed by the melody - ends of phrases, punctuation, suggestions of cadence. The chord sequence serves that purpose, but there's no harm in treating it as fixed to begin with: this is one good reliable, workable set of chords. There may be others, but let's not think about that right now Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
. (Let's keep the training wheels on the bike while learning to balance...)
In fact, one other possible problem with CST is it can encourage the retention of a fixed sequence, by making each individual chord seem more important than it is. If one learns a whole load of chord-scales for a progression - and then has to consider the idea of reharmonization - aargh, the ground's taken away from under one's feet!
A melodic and linear approach keeps the idea of the flexibility of a chord sequence open; what matters is not fixed points of harmony (chord stacks) but movement from point to point: underpinning the melody with interesting harmonies, but also moving to cadences in new ways, or changing cadences. Inner voices, bass lines - almost as if the chords created at any point in the movement are incidental.
I know it sounds like I'm generally down on CST, but I do think it's an important and useful system of organisation of harmonic material. I just think it has no place in teaching jazz beginners how to approach traditional standards using functional progressions. (Of course I'm assuming that's a good thing for beginners to do, rather than confront modern jazz - with all its complex references and implications - head on.)
Reply With Quote
How is the Steve Howe 175?
Today, 05:54 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos