-
Yes, understood.
Originally Posted by marceff
There is the classical system of "figured bass" - related to partially improvised baroque music - which is a little similar to jazz/pop chord symbols (in hinting at harmony rather than notating it precisely), but it uses different symbols.
Figured bass - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
-
09-12-2014 07:27 AM
-
To come back to your previous post, when you mentioned my examples, the second D7#9 - Ebm, this last one has to be intended as minor melodic, just as an altered scale, as well as the first example, Cm as minor melodic, in this case is not altered.
-
I'm still having a little trouble with your English... Originally Posted by marceff
D7#9 - Ebm: yes, a mode of Eb melodic minor (that's what we call it, not "minor melodic") is what they have in common. It's known as the "D altered" scale when D is the root (and also as "superlocrian", or "diminished wholetone" in some texts).
Am7b5 - Cm: These could share the C melodic minor scale, but also the Bb major scale (or its modes).
There is a jazz theory that says C melodic minor is a good scale on Am7b5 - because it contains a B instead of Bb, which sounds better against the chord - and it would be known as "A locrian natural 2", or "aeolian b5".
-
Back again...
Talking about "tonality" (key), I aware that (in jazz) scales are "patterns" related to keys. E.g. the G dorian belongs to F/Dm tonalities (keys) as it has Bb (and not A#!!), as well as the G phrygian has Bb - Eb - Ab (and not A# - D# - G#) and belongs to Eb/Cm keys. This is what have confused me. In jazz there is not difference between Bb and A#, which is true as they have the same pitch (not really if you play bow instruments, brass, etc), but there is quite a lot difference if you keep in mind keys (as I normally do), in fact there is no keys which have A# - D# - G#. I was trained as instrument player, other than that I had to study elementary harmony and of course musical notation (solfeggio), so I never heard talking about all those scales, except of diatonic and minor (harmonic and melodic). Now I am going into jazz theory and of course I kindly ask you if I am on the right way...
-
...I already know that what I am going to say will sound heretic, but if we look to super locrian G scale we see a Db scale starting from G. So talking of altered scale Db could be related to G as 5b, instead of a melodic minor half tone ahead.
-
Are you saying that G super locrian (altered) is the same as Db major? If so, then I would say that you are wrong about that. The Db major scale has a Gb. If you are saying that Db major with a G natural instead of Gb is the same as G altered, then I think that's true although it may be a little early in the morning yet for me.
I don't think anything is considered heretic as long as it is true.
-
No, not really. On guitar, scales do form patterns, obviously, but every jazz musician knows those patterns are not related to key, mode or tonality - e.g., a "G major scale" pattern could obviously be used in the G major key, but also for any mode of those 7 notes Originally Posted by marceff
No, not exactly. It just happens to be the same notes. Originally Posted by marceff
We'd say G dorian mode is "relative to" F major, in the same way as D minor is.
But F major, D minor, and G dorian are three different sounds - two keys, one mode. They share the same notes (and therefore the same patterns on a guitar neck), but not the same keynote.
This is a common misconception: that "G dorian mode" is somehow "within" the F major key. It isn't, any more than D minor is "within" F major.
OK, I see what you mean (I think). Originally Posted by marceff
Jazz musicians understand very well that Bb and A# are different - that F major has a Bb, while B major has an A#, etc - but at the same time jazz harmony often plays on the ambiguity of the pitch. And yes, for harmonic purposes, they are regarded as the same (equal tempered) pitch, issues of pure intonation (as on strings or horns) are ignored.
E.g., classical theory regards a Bdim7 chord (B D F Ab) as belonging to the key of C minor, as the normal vii ("leading tone") chord in that key, resolving to the tonic.
Jazz knows that too, but equally it likes to observe (thanks to equal temperament) that the same 4 pitches can act as vii in Eb minor, F# minor or A minor. Or indeed in the parallel major keys. As such, it will often be lazy about how the chord is spelled. You might find Bdim7 resolving to Am, even though, strictly speaking, it should be called G#dim7, even if B is the bass note. Likewise, a vii chord leading to F#m might be called Fdim7 (or Ddim7, G#dim7, Bdim7), instead of the correct E#dim7.
Jazz musicians also habitually regard Bdim7 as a "rootless G7b9", and commonly think of it as a substitute for G7. They often (apparently) like to ignore the fact that it is a bona fide 7th chord in its own right.
I mentioned previously about "tritone substitutes", and how classical music might see them as "augmented 6ths", a term you won't find in jazz theory. The chord F-A-C-D# (a "german 6th") would be written as F-A-C-Eb and called F7 in jazz - a "dominant 7th". In classical, F-A-C-D# would (almost) always resolve to E in key of A minor. In jazz, as F7, there's all kinds of ways it might be used. It could well resolve to E, but could be in key of E or E minor, or anywhere.
-
Not exactly: G superlocrian (aka G altered) is the same notes as Ab melodic minor: G Ab Bb Cb Db Eb F. Originally Posted by marceff
As a "Db scale", that would be called "Db lydian dominant", because it has a #4 (G) and a b7 (Cb).
The point about the altered scale (taking G altered) is that it contains the root, 3rd and 7th of a G7 chord (G, B, F, if we read Cb as B); plus both altered 5ths (b5=Db, #5=D#/Eb) and both altered 9ths (b9=Ab, #9=A#/Bb).
The alterations provide half-step voice-leading on to chord tones or extensions on to the tonic chord (C or Cm).
The resemblance to Ab melodic minor is merely a useful coincidence (useful, that is, if you are familiar with melodic minor scales...).
This connects with the tritone substitute I mentioned above. The tritone sub for G7 is Db7. When Db7 is used to resolve to C or Cm, it can have extensions from the same set of notes as G altered: the 9th (of Db) is Eb, #11th is G, 13th is Bb.
So "G7alt" (altered) and Db7#11 (lydian dominant) are really the same chords - potentially - only the bass note is different.
Again, this is about treating enharmonic pitches as essentially the same note. B is 3rd of G7 and Cb is 7th of Db7; but the point is they sound the same, so will work the same way.
I.e., classical theory would dictate that "Cb", on a Db7 chord, must descend, to Bb on a Gb major chord (or Bbb on a hypothetical Gbm). If it's called "B", on the other hand, then it must ascend to C. In jazz, who cares? It can go both ways, or either.
Last edited by JonR; 09-17-2014 at 09:19 AM.
-
To Colin: I am learning so I look here and there to collect info, in this case:
G Super Locrian Guitar Scales
I don't see any Gb in super locrian, maybe they have mistaken.
Ok, they aren't related to keys, but you use them on top of chords sequence, so if I'm on II V I = G C F, can't I use the G dorian? (I keep using very elementary example to be clear and to understand)....jazz musician knows those patterns are not related to key, mode or tonality...
can you please explain what keynote is?...keynote...
Ok, I understand than G dorian is not related to F maj; still can't understand why, and/or to what is related to...."G dorian mode" is somehow "within" the F major key. It isn't, any more than D minor is "within" F major.
I do understand that something can be different from classical, but jazz theory seems to start somewhere else, just try to catch where...
I do also understand that jazz is not just a mix of scales (thanks god) but I am on a learning level, so I need to make it simple, having well in mind which is far more complex.
-
To Colin: sorry I did mistake as I misunderstanding reading Gb as s. locrian (English is not my language...). So you're right.
Same to Jon I have mistaken, don't pay attention to my last post.
-
Well - sorry to confuse - but they are related! Strictly speaking they are "relative" - the same 7 notes, shared by two keys and five modes. Originally Posted by marceff
The question is, how is that relationship useful when playing - if indeed it is?
Ah now, we come to a language problem that confuses English speakers, let alone Italian speakers! Originally Posted by marceff
Firstly, best to describe a ii-V-I in F major as Gm-C-F. "G" on its own means a G major chord. (and jazz musicians will typically add 7ths to all of them as well: Gm7-C7-Fmaj7.)
Secondly - yes you can "use G dorian", but what exactly does that mean? You are using 7 notes, essentially: the same 7 notes as the diatonic key scale (shared by all three chords). So why not just say "use F major"?
It's true that, on each chord in isolation, those 7 notes will sound like G dorian, C mixolydian and F ionian (major).
But (a) those sounds are caused by the chords, not by the pattern or order you choose to play the notes in; and (b) the chords are not in isolation, they are a quick-changing sequence in F major.
So the modal terms are pointless. It's simply a ii-V-I in F major, and the appropriate scale is the F major scale. Period. Modal terms have no useful application. (If you found a source that suggests they do, either they are wrong, or you may be misunderstanding them.)
For the term "G dorian" to be meaningful, the Gm chord would have to sound like "I" - ie, the tonic or key chord. In that context, it doesn't; it sounds like "ii".
As I say, it makes no difference how you play those 7 notes, the sound (mode or chord function) is governed by the context. So you are in no way "using G dorian". If anything (if the Gm chord is the key chord), it's using you!
Tonic - usually. Originally Posted by marceff
When it's a mode rather than a key, then the term is debatable. The correct (medieval!) term for the root of a mode is "finalis" or "final". Now, the term "tonal centre" is more appropriate, because "tonic", strictly, refers to major and minor keys only, not modes. Major and minor keys form the system of "tonality", which replaced the previous modal system ("modality"?).
As an analogy, to use the word "tonic" to refer to modes would be like using the word "film" (from photography) to refer to the canvas of an oil painting.
However, IMO - and because modes today (in jazz) are very different from medieval modes - the word "keynote" is OK, as long as context makes it clear. So:
F major key: F is tonic, keynote and/or tonal centre
G dorian mode: G is keynote or tonal centre. (Best avoid "tonic".)
In key of F major, G is the "supertonic" note, and the "root" of the ii (supertonic) chord (Gm).
As I say, it is related, but only in that it's the same 7 notes. Having a different keynote makes all the difference. Originally Posted by marceff
I always think the best advice when learning jazz is just to study the tunes, the classic jazz standards. Don't worry about theory first, and certainly don't learn any theory when you don't know any tunes it might apply to. Originally Posted by marceff
Look at the melodies of the tunes.
Then look at the chords: study how they harmonise the tune (usually in a much freer way than classical); and how the roots move (commonly down in 5ths or up in 4ths).
You will see lots of chords from outside the given key signature. Often these are following classical harmony practices (secondary dominants, secondary leading tone chords, etc).
Occasionally it can be harder to trace the rule they might be following. In that case, look again at the way they harmonise the melody, the way the root moves (between the chords either side); but also think about the possible voice-leading.
With jazz chord symbols, of course, specific voicing (the vertical order of the notes) is not stipulated. The player is free to voice the given notes any way he/she likes. But good players will know how to link the chords smoothly by creating good voice-leading lines.
Always, you can understand strange chords by looking at how the notes in them link between the chords either side - you don't need to explain how they relate to the current key.
Those old jazz standards, by the way, are not in any way "modal". Modes have no place at all in analysing or interpreting how any jazz tune written before 1959 works - nor (IMO) are they any use in understanding how to improvise on them. (The masters of that period managed well enough without modes.)
For post-1959 jazz, then modal concepts may well have a place, because that was when jazz harmony underwent a revolution - thanks largely to Miles Davis, Bill Evans, and John Coltrane.
The whole theory of modal jazz, and "applying modes" (and "chord-scale theory") was developed to explain jazz of that era (and later). Not before.
Of course, one can apply modal thinking retrospectively to older jazz, as a way of re-interpreting it, maybe developing it in ways beyond what they could have imagined back then. But it's important to know that's what you're doing: grafting on a later set of ideas on to music which was ignorant of them.
Otherwise, it's like you're looking at the Mona Lisa and asking what kind of camera Leonardo used...
Last edited by JonR; 09-17-2014 at 12:58 PM.
-
Jon give a couple days to read your words (I don't want to miss any). I have given a first read but I have to do it several times. For now just let me thank you, you are a gold mine of knowledge... thanks, you're really help me
-
You're right, I am agree. Gm has 1b as belongs to F keyFirstly, best to describe a ii-V-I in F major as Gm-C-F. "G" on its own means a G major chord. (and jazz musicians will typically add 7ths to all of them as well: Gm7-C7-Fmaj7.)
...
Well this is what I'm trying to understand: what's the difference in playing F maj scale starting to G (as Dorian)?Secondly - yes you can "use G dorian", but what exactly does that mean? You are using 7 notes, essentially: the same 7 notes as the diatonic key scale (shared by all three chords). So why not just say "use F major"?
I just talking as musical logic theory, to give something to my mind, I do play a lot using my ears most.
Let's see if I get it: in the mentioned example we are dealing with tonal approach, as Fmaj is the key. Keeping it schematic, I play Fmaj scale which can be diatonic, pentatonic, etc. If I mix Gm melodic, C Dorian and F Dorian then it would be a modal approach (see it as a elementary example). If so, I still deal with modes, assuming that Fmaj diatonic, dorian, etc are modes (aren't they?).(a) those sounds are caused by the chords, not by the pattern or order you choose to play the notes in; and (b) the chords are not in isolation, they are a quick-changing sequence in F major.
I start to play again 3 month ago, as a friend of mine gave me an electrical guitar as gift (!!!) a brand new Telecaster. I graduated in double bass and I have played it for 10/15 years after degree. Then life brought me somewhere else... I am now very excited to find myself involved again in music, especially jazz, which has always interested me that much, but for various reasons I never got to study. In the past three months I started studying old pieces of American music such as "The man I love", "Black bird", "Foggy Day", "Autumn leaves", etc, (without neglecting ii V I) enriching them with more chords and improvisation, making harmonic analysis (for what my musical knowledge has allowed). I think that's what you're suggesting me to do (do not know what you mean by "tunes", is probably referring to the old pieces of music? or tonal pieces?).
-
OK. Firstly, all you're doing is playing the F major scale starting on G. Questions: (a) what does that sound like; (b) what do we call it? Originally Posted by marceff
Both ways, it's a matter of context and sound.
With no context - say you're just playing the scale - well, it is what it is.
Do you feel the note you start on gives that note any important value relative to the others?
Probably you do. Our ears hear an opening note, and instinctively attempt to relate the following ones back to it.
A lot will depend on things like accent of course - eg if you imply some kind of rhythm as you're playing, or alter the length of the notes. Longer notes and louder notes will tend to assume more importance.
But once we've heard a whole series of notes, we're probably waiting for some kind of closure. What's the last note going to be?
Generally speaking, in other words, it's the last note of any phrase you play that is likely to have more tonal significance than the first one. That is, you can play around at random with the F major scale - starting on any note, playing in any order - but if you end firmly on a G, then a "G dorian sound" might emerge. It will be a lot clearer, of course, if you also start on G, and play G quite frequently. Otherwise, random noodling on the F major scale will sound like - well - F major! (Seeing as our familiarity with "do re mi" and the major key will make us assume F is tonic, in the absence of emphasis on any other note.)
Now, that's a kind of artificial situation! You want to know about improvising within a context - specifically a Gm-C-F chord progression.
What happens then is that the chords (via their roots, largely) establish the tonality, or mode(s).
Let's say you're on the Gm chord. You play your F major scale starting on G. That will sound like G dorian, right enough - but that's because of the chord. Try playing the scale starting on any other note. The modal sound is still G dorian. The note you start on makes no difference in that respect. Obviously starting on other notes sounds different - but it's not a modal difference. The starting note (of any phrase) is irrelevant. The "G dorian" sound is produced by the combination of the Gm chord (its root in particular) and the set of notes played (F major scale in any order).
OK, now the C chord comes along. You start your scale on G again. The modal sound is "C mixolydian". Again, starting note makes no difference, and the chord governs the modal sound produced. The sound is "C mixolydian starting on the 5th".)
What about the F chord? Start your scale on G there, and the sound is "F major starting on the 2nd." It's not "G dorian". You can stress the G all you like, you won't get a G dorian sound. You'll get a "9th of F major" sound. Nice enough, just not "dorian".
Moreover, if these chords are moving fairly quickly - say 4 beats or less each - then the overall sound is "F major key". The Gm and C chords don't last long enough to have their own modal identity. So there's not even any point in thinking of the chords as "G dorian - C mixolydian - F ionian". They're simply "ii-V-I in F major."
In other words, this is about using the most sensible terms to refer to the sounds we are getting. It's not about what sounds good or bad. It's about understanding what modal terms mean, and how best to apply them. (The terms, I mean, not the scales.)
If you want, you can say you're "using G dorian on an F chord" (to refer to the fact you're starting on G), as long as you know it's not a G dorian sound you're getting. Personally I regard that as meaningless and a little silly
Ah, now this is a different - more interesting question... Originally Posted by marceff
Yes, you can choose a different pitch collection (scale) for each chord if you want. Question (again): how do you think that will sound? Why not try it and see?
What it will do is make the sequence sound disjointed, and like it's not in the key of F major. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, if that's the effect you want.
A lot depends on how the three chords are perceived in the first place. If the key of F major has been previously established - eg by a typical diatonic melody and chord sequence - then Gm-C-F are going to fit right in.
When you come to improvise, then, the specific scales you mention contain notes which might sound wrong:
G melodic minor contains F#;
C dorian contains Eb;
F dorian contains Ab and Eb.
In the context of F major, Ab and Eb might sound OK - but they will sound like blues scale notes. So, again, better to think of them in that way than as chord-modes. Choose those notes by all means, but know the sound - and then call the sound whatever you like!
As for the F# - that's possibly the worst note you could choose in an F major context. It's still not ruled out - it could work as a chromatic passing note, reslving up to G (root) or down to F (diatonic 7th). Again, play it, listen to it, decide if it sounds right or wrong. If it sounds wrong, is there a way you can make it right (eg by following it with G or F)?
That's what matters - not whether you think of "G melodic minor".
Or rather, whether you choose G melodic minor should depend on an awareness of the context of your Gm chord - not just on the fact that it's Gm! (In any case, in a jazz sequence in F, the Gm will probably be "Gm7" - that should tell you straight away that G melodic minor - with its major 7th - is not right.)
But simplest of all is not to look at each chord individually anyway. Recognise that all three belong to the same scale.
That doesn't rule out the use of other notes! Jazz is always using chromatics. But the idea is that you are adding to or altering the diatonic key scale, for certain melodic or harmonic reasons. You are not applying other scales.
Eg, even when it comes to the C7 chord - over which a jazz player might choose the "C altered scale" - that's all about finding chromatic transitions between diatonic (F major) notes. It's not about the C altered scale itself. (It's certainly not about "Db melodic minor".)
Eg, if a b9 (Db) is added to the C7 chord, that's going to be a transition between D and C, in either direction (on the chords either side). (It might not resolve immediately - eg to the 6th or 5th of F - it might be delayed. But that half-step resolution is what the ear expects.)
That's exactly what I mean. Originally Posted by marceff
When jazz players refer to a "tune", they usually mean an entire composition - although sometimes they'll be referring to the melody alone. In a sense, the idea is that the melody IS the entire piece, certainly the soul of the piece.
Eg "Foggy Day is a nice tune" means it's a nice composition altogether (melody and chords).
"Can you play the tune?" means can you play the melody (not just the chords).
A chord progression is often referred to as "the changes"
The thing with jazz is to remember it's a language. It's not just those old tunes, but the way those old tunes are handled. It would be possible to play Autumn Leaves - and even improvise on it - without it sounding like "jazz" at all. You don't have to care! But generally jazz players learn by immersing themselves in jazz recordings, to get the feel of the accent of the language. [I'm sure you know how it is to hear non-Italians trying to speak Italian...]
Not just the kinds of scales, etc, but the rhythms and accents: that's something that classically trained musicians can have a lot of trouble with. (You only have to listen to those duets that Yehudi Menuhin played with Stephane Grappelly to hear how stiff YM sounded in comparison with SG's easy, light swing. YM was a brilliant technician, of course, but he was a beginner when it came to jazz feel.)
-
Yes, I know what you mean... I don't even like violin voice playing jazz.(You only have to listen to those duets that Yehudi Menuhin played with Stephane Grappelly to hear how stiff YM sounded in comparison with SG's easy, light swing. YM was a brilliant technician, of course, but he was a beginner when it came to jazz feel.)
I am not quite agree: music, I mean all music, is made by accents. Classical scores are full of accents symbols, I remember my teacher saying an infinite times how to be very concern about accents when performing. It is true that in jazz accents are something very different from classical, so it would be very difficult for a classical trained musician get into jazz... but when I was a kid, before my conservatory experience, I have played a lot of blues (as bass player) together with a British guitarist John Mayal stylerhythms and accents: that's something that classically trained musicians can have a lot of trouble with
, so I am save!
-
Yes, that's what I mean. Of course accent is important in classical, but jazz accents are not written, they're intuitive. As is swing, that un-notatable rhythmic feel. Originally Posted by marceff
Yes! Blues should save you! Originally Posted by marceff
but when I was a kid, before my conservatory experience, I have played a lot of blues (as bass player) together with a British guitarist John Mayal style, so I am save!
Reply With Quote
Melody between melody
Today, 03:25 AM in Chord-Melody