Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Posts 51 to 100 of 199
  1. #51

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar View Post
    no, i'm probably not. i did go to my first barry harris clinic in 1992, you can actually see me on some of the vids that are online now. but i'm also influenced by other teachers, like hal galper or my several guitar teachers over the years.
    Then you'll hopefully kind of get what I'm going on about with whole V dominant scale thing...

    I really like Hal Galper as well. I find it makes a really interesting counterpart to Barry's teaching. I got a lot out of Forward Motion, still do.

    Anyway - this is no doubt familiar to you - but I attach a quick and pretty simple set of lines based on what I was talking about above... Very straightforward stuff, but just to demonstrate really the sort of thing I mean...

    Down the scale, then up in a stack of thirds (arpeggios) which seemed typical of the types of things Barry was running in ensemble in the improvisation workshop... Also seen similar things in other Barry related resources online.

    The process, of course, spits out very typical bop exercises of the type you would encounter in most textbooks. I've only sketched out some simple variations - there are dozens of other things you can do with this basic idea. The room for variation & invention is practically limitless.

    Barry Harris & Wes Montgomery-img_1825-jpg

    If you were analysing this from a different perspective you might use the understanding in red pen - i.e. this arpeggio over G7 - G7, Bm7b5, Dm7/6, Fmaj7 ('the family of four'). In Barry's understanding you don't need to think this way as everything comes from a melodic development of the scale - down the scale, adding notes as appropriate, then up in thirds. If I've understood this right.

    The advantage over more chordal thinking AFAIK, is that if you get these rules plugged in so that they are intuitive, you can start to run lines that are idiomatic bop without ever resorting to licks.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-19-2016 at 12:02 PM.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #52
    destinytot Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes View Post
    Yeah, I have that, though I read it in small doses. Owens is remarkable in his approach. At the same time, he makes clear that he doesn't know how Charlie Parker thought about these things, or whether they were even conscious choices. He knew what he was doing, and what he was doing was meticulously well-wrought.
    I've been pondering my reaction to this (inspiring) conversation about what sounds like absolutely fascinating work by Thomas Owens.

    On the one hand, I'm curious to know more - and I intend to read his work. But on the other hand, it seems to be prompting me towards taking advantage of forum member jordanklemons's generous sharing of his MA thesis (on triads +1) by putting it next to recordings of Sean Levitt - and putting on my thinking cap.

    Recordings of Sean aren't indicative of his typical live sets, during which he played Parker in ways that left few listeners unmoved (some of us found it a life-changing experience) and which he always ended with The Theme (I miss hearing tthat).

    Sean sounded like no-one but himself - even when playing Wes or Bird - and I wish I'd taken advantage of the chance to hear him with Barry Harris.

  4. #53

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar View Post
    i don't recall this from the workshops i visited. i need too watch the vids again. i do recall just going up and down the scale (from 1 to 7) with tunes like cherokee. iirc the only exception was the wholetone scale which he had the vocalists sing in thirds to the lyrics of "i can sing the wholetone scale in thirds". the practice tune for this was "end of a beautiful friendship" iirc. are there examples of going down the scale and then up in thirds? i don't doubt you but simply can't remember.

    when talking about all this stuff, barry harris scales, the family of four, martino's minor conversion, wes' major conversion, etc. i'm often reminded of this card game where only the gamemaster knows the rules and the other players have to find them out by playing a card. which means you can play sucessfully even if your hypothesis of the rules does differ greatly from the secretly given rules.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...d_Game_Eleusis
    Oh yes, that all sounds familiar. The 1-7 thing is the gateway to all this other stuff... Once you have the basic scales down you can move on from there... I suppose a typical next step is to run scales through the progression using the added notes. But that really is just one of a myriad possibilities.

    I went to a few BH workshops over the years. It was a bit frustrating because I couldn't get the time to go to a run of the workshops, but in addition with online materials, I've started to piece together the bigger picture.

    There are loads of great BH patterns such as thirds with a semitone before...

    B C E C# D F D# E | G etc

    Pivots on arpeggios (one of my favourites) and so on... Loads of things you can do to lines to make language... It's an approach with a lot of depth. Like I say the thing I like about it is that you can start with pretty basic scales (i.e. the mixolydian or the melodic minor) and develop them into endlessly flowing melodic lines that sound like bebop. It's a fantastic approach and the only thing is that I can always think of so many variations of the basic material that it can be a bit overwhelming - just take the sheet I posted above.

    - try pivots on the arpeggios - 1st note, 2nd note etc
    - start the line on a non-chord tone on G7
    - use a longer scale and/or arpeggio line
    - can we do it in 3?
    - try it in minor
    - Instead of using G dominant, run the same patterns through D melodic minor using the appropriate passing tones
    And so on and so forth.

    The thing is increasingly I can't help viewing things I am learning - Along Came Betty, for example - through the Barry Harris prism. I might write out an analysis of it...

    Interesting link. I certainly know what you mean
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-19-2016 at 03:50 PM.

  5. #54

    User Info Menu

    Barry will drop nuggets of jazz wisdom without emphasis. I've attended many workshops and would occasionally selfishly think 'he said this last time, I'm not hearing anything new' and then one day I'd hear something for the umpteenth time and be ready to understand it. The scope of what he is telling us is so exciting.

    My take on Barry's teaching is that he imparts a compact amount of theory with vast potential.

  6. #55

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NSJ View Post
    barry also shared Wes' disdain for Trane's Impulse era music --wonder what that was all about ? I know from reading something that Wes felt his time with Trane's band was not the best place for him --he didn't dig playing one song for 45 minutes straight.

    wonder what Barry's beef was ?
    You don't see why Barry might not like McCoys stuff? To me Barry's playing was always about finding good ways to move around in functional harmony, he also really tries to teach and explain how to treat different areas of functional harmony. It seems quite obvious that when Coltrane started playing modal stuff with no real relations between the chords and staying on one chord for a long time it is immmediately very far from Barry's whole musical world?

    In many ways it is ironic that Barry really talks about all the different aspects of the songs with all details of functional harmony and then his own scale system is reducing everything to I and V. That was always a mystery to me.

    I don't think Wes used Barry Harris stuff, he just used dim chords as dominants to harmonize lines. That technique is very old and is not something that Barry can take credit for (I also don't think he would). The fact that he made it into a scale and gave it a name does not mean he invented the harmonization technique.

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  7. #56

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar View Post
    i was at this workshop (i'm not the guitarist). man, i feel like marty mcfly...

    I've been to a lot of the workshops in Studio IV too! It was some years later than this though

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  8. #57

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    You don't see why Barry might not like McCoys stuff? To me Barry's playing was always about finding good ways to move around in functional harmony, he also really tries to teach and explain how to treat different areas of functional harmony. It seems quite obvious that when Coltrane started playing modal stuff with no real relations between the chords and staying on one chord for a long time it is immmediately very far from Barry's whole musical world?

    In many ways it is ironic that Barry really talks about all the different aspects of the songs with all details of functional harmony and then his own scale system is reducing everything to I and V. That was always a mystery to me.

    I don't think Wes used Barry Harris stuff, he just used dim chords as dominants to harmonize lines. That technique is very old and is not something that Barry can take credit for (I also don't think he would). The fact that he made it into a scale and gave it a name does not mean he invented the harmonization technique.

    Jens
    I think it's about reducing the harmony of the song to a easily manageable set of functions and then introducing your own movement creatively through the changes - studying bebop lines - and swing for that matter - shows this right away. What Steve Coleman calls 'invisible paths' - we think of 'chord subs' but I feel that's a rather vertical, rigid way to teach it.

    AFAIK the idea is less about playing vertically over the changes all the time but introducing a flow of harmony or harmonic melody through the song that contains all the important basic resolutions and modulations etc, and if needs be, can support the melody - getting away from all that ii V I stuff, playing out of the arpeggios all the time etc (not that that isn't an important basic thing to be able to do.)

    I really like that ethos.

    In the Barry Harris system, scales have their own tensions and releases both in harmony and melody and the system gives you a way to manage this very specifically, while with modal jazz you have more static or colouristic scales that just sit there. BH's scales are dynamic and create a functional tonal dynamism. At least that's how I view it in my own playing.

    If I play the lydian on a major seventh or something, I am articulating the extended sound of the chord - it's not important where I put my chord tones because every note is a chord tone in a sense. This is not true with the major scale.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-20-2016 at 07:20 AM.

  9. #58

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I think it's about reducing the harmony of the song to a easily manageable set of functions and then introducing your own movement creatively through the changes - studying bebop lines - and swing for that matter - shows this right away. What Steve Coleman calls 'invisible paths' - we think of 'chord subs' but I feel that's a rather vertical, rigid way to teach it.

    AFAIK the idea is less about playing vertically over the changes all the time but introducing a flow of harmony or harmonic melody through the song that contains all the important basic resolutions and modulations etc, and if needs be, can support the melody - getting away from all that ii V I stuff, playing out of the arpeggios all the time etc (not that that isn't an important basic thing to be able to do.)

    I really like that ethos.
    He does do that, and as I said that is great for standard playing and is also what he does best both as a player and as a teacher (in my opinion anyway...)

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    In the Barry Harris system, scales have their own tensions and releases both in harmony and melody and the system gives you a way to manage this very specifically, while with modal jazz you have more static or colouristic scales that just sit there. BH's scales are dynamic and create a functional tonal dynamism. At least that's how I view it in my own playing.
    The reduction to V and I I am talking about is his sixth dim scale where the diatonic chords are alternating Tonic chords and dim chords. It actually takes away from all the nuances of funtional harmony that you can only get if you create suspensions (stuff like a Cmaj7 chord or an Fmaj7 chord in the key of C). This is taking away a lot from the "flow of harmony or harmonic melody through the song that contains all the important basic resolutions and modulations etc"

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    If I play the lydian on a major seventh or something, I am articulating the extended sound of the chord - it's not important where I put my chord tones because every note is a chord tone in a sense. This is not true with the major scale.
    Except if you never play the #4 in which case you will sound like major, so in that case it is important where you put your chord tones.

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  10. #59

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    He does do that, and as I said that is great for standard playing and is also what he does best both as a player and as a teacher (in my opinion anyway...)
    To be honest, anything which isn't standard playing or bop is probably not jazz in Barry's mind. But BH's work adresses functional harmony, which does extend beyond jazz.

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    The reduction to V and I I am talking about is his sixth dim scale where the diatonic chords are alternating Tonic chords and dim chords. It actually takes away from all the nuances of funtional harmony that you can only get if you create suspensions (stuff like a Cmaj7 chord or an Fmaj7 chord in the key of C). This is taking away a lot from the "flow of harmony or harmonic melody through the song that contains all the important basic resolutions and modulations etc"
    I don't think you have understood the scope of Barry's harmonic teaching.

    The 6th/diminished 7th thing through the scale is the absolute basics, the ABC to get you started. It's the same thing as four way close writing which has been around since Fletcher Henderson. It's simply one way of going through the scale that produces an immediately musical and useful result. But a lot of people only get that far and go 'so what? That stuff's in the Jazz Piano Book.'

    The BH stuff has a particular harmonic style. If you had Cmaj7 or Fmaj7 in the key of C, these chords would contain combinations of borrowed notes and notes belonging to the C6. You would then have a number of options to voice lead these chords into a resolution through the scale in beautiful and elegant ways. For example:

    Fmaj7 E/F C6
    Dm9 Fminmaj7/G C6
    Dm7/A G13/Ab C6/9

    And so on. Not just V-I. The thing is you wouldn't be thinking of these chord symbols, you'd be thinking of the scale and the movement and these movements would emerge naturally, in the same way the Bach isn't really reflected by writing his harmony down in chord symbols....

    TBH I'm not the best person to ask if you want to learn more on this because my studies recently have focussed mostly on the single note stuff. Im thinking the Pasquale Grasso video might address this material...

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    Except if you never play the #4 in which case you will sound like major, so in that case it is important where you put your chord tones.

    Jens
    If you don't play the #4 what's the point of playing the Lydian? :-) If I play Lydian, or Altered, or Lydian Dominant in standards, I am making a point. I want to catch someone's ear and make them go 'ooh that's a pretty sound.' My meat and potatoes stuff is dominant/major/minor harmony
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-20-2016 at 08:48 AM.

  11. #60

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    To be honest, anything which isn't standard playing or bop is probably not jazz in Barry's mind. But BH's work adresses functional harmony, which does extend beyond jazz.
    What part of Functional harmony is beyond jazz according to you? And while you are at it I would be curious to see how Barry then covers that

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    The BH stuff has a particular harmonic style. If you had Cmaj7 or Fmaj7 in the key of C, these chords would contain combinations of borrowed notes and notes belonging to the C6. You would then have a number of options to voice lead these chords into a resolution through the scale in beautiful and elegant ways.
    Which is exactly my point! The Fmaj7 (ie a subdominant chord) can only be described as a suspended dominant (a dominant with notes replaced by tonic notes..)

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    For example:

    Fmaj7 E/F C6
    Dm9 Fminmaj7/G C6
    Dm7/A G13/Ab C6/9

    And so on. Not just V-I. The thing is you wouldn't be thinking of these chord symbols, you'd be thinking of the scale and the movement and these movements would emerge naturally, in the same way the Bach isn't really reflected by writing his harmony down in chord symbols....
    Which is great for solo pieces, but meanwhile the bass player and the horn is still thinking chords just like Barry taught them (in the video above...)
    I understand that you can experiement with it and then use the nice stuff that you find (As far as I can tell from the piano workshops, that is also how Barry works btw..) But in order to use it you still need to reduce the music you want to use it in down to V and I bits or chunks of different more or less related six dim scales.

    Did you ever try to come up with a six dim scale for the altered scale?

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    If you don't play the #4 what's the point of playing the Lydian? :-) If I play Lydian, or Altered, or Lydian Dominant in standards, I am making a point. I want to catch someone's ear and make them go 'ooh that's a pretty sound.' My meat and potatoes stuff is dominant/major/minor harmony
    Yes exactly! So don't state that it does not matter what notes you play and then say the exact opposite two posts later...

    Barry was a guest teacher for a week every year at the conservatory where I studied and I attended the workshop twice before I started. I did actually spend some time on his stuff.

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  12. #61

    User Info Menu

    Christian is right. The Barry Harris stuff initially looks as if it is just alternating 6th chords and diminished chords if you just run through the chord charts and leave it there.

    But if you really apply it to actual tunes to create chord melody or chord solo type ideas, it really starts to take off.

    By borrowing notes (or 'tweaking' them to use Randy Vincent's phrase, which I like because it implies a slightly less strict approach than Barry's borrowing rules), you can get just about any extension you want on the chords, but still preserving the simplicity of the overall method.

  13. #62

    User Info Menu

    For a six dim scale on the altered dominant you just play bII minor 6 dim scale.

    So on G7 alt you can play Barry's Ab minor sixth diminished chord scale. And of course you can sub it with diminished chords (e.g. F dim and the other 3 that go with it), so that's 2 ways of covering it.

  14. #63

    User Info Menu

    Barry was a guest teacher for a week every year at the conservatory where I studied and I attended the workshop twice before I started. I did actually spend some time on his stuff.

    Jens
    This was longer, but to be honest, I don't see what I could add that wouldn't be better addressed by the man himself.

    I'm not a Barry evangelist, and TBH defending or explaining his theory has taken up to much time already. It works for me, I like it - I would say that it's a great way to learn about bop and I would recommend it to students of that music. But ultimately, take it or leave it.

    For me I had to spend a lot of time on his material independently. TBH I attended his workshops on and off for around a decade and only really got into the very basics. TBH I got totally roasted in the improvisation class, learned very little in the actual class beyond the block chord thing (which took enough time) and the basic added note scales. But I remember what he was doing, and that's allowed me to work on it myself, in addition to checking out various online resources by him and his students.

    It was really getting into the basic added note scale stuff on my own that piqued my interest as to what I else I could get into. I'd always had loads of respect for the guy, loved his playing, but hadn't always been able to follow what he was talking about in workshops (very soft spoken, lots of people crowding around the piano etc.)

    I don't see where the argument is really. Either you go down the Barry Harris rabbit hole or you don't. But it's something that takes serious dedicated study to really get into...
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-20-2016 at 09:40 AM.

  15. #64

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I don't see where the argument is really. Either you go down the Barry Harris rabbit hole or you don't. But it's something that takes serious dedicated study to really get into...
    By now the argument is going off topic because you are stating things but refusing to explain what you mean.

    Surely if the system is such a great way to learn jazz then you guys can show me in some way? Take 16 bars of "I love you" or "All of You" and explain it according to the 6th dim system or demonstrate a great harmonization of the melody that you make using that.

    Don't just tell me that it goes really deep and can explain everything bebop or beyond functional harmony, why do I have to believe you if you don't want to explain it to me?

    For me the 6th dim thing was always just a framework for experimenting, so regardless of the key (I think the alt scale example from Graham illustrates that quite well?) You force a maj6 or min6 sound over a chord and then start experimenting with what sort of chords you can get out of it. That is also how I've seen Barry use it in the piano classes.

    You have to realize that I find that ok for a system, a lot of great music can be made like that, and I think it is fine tool for experimentation. I just don't like when it is turned into a grand unifying theory without any substantial argument as to why it is so great. That is my criticism.

    I am also not really happy with reducing II V I to V I because it makes you end up practicing your A7b9 to G7 lines in C. That said if you chose the right standard it can be a very good way to introduce and practice scales similar to what he demonstrates in the video and I have used that in lessons.

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  16. #65
    destinytot Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    You have to realize that I find that ok for a system, a lot of great music can be made like that, and I think it is fine tool for experimentation. I just don't like when it is turned into a grand unifying theory without any substantial argument as to why it is so great.
    I like it as a system and as a tool, but I'm glad to see you put this into perspective.

    Without wishing to cross a line by being personal, I've watched some of your videos and I've been very impressed by your teaching. And on the subject of compelling argument, it was very refreshing to hear you say 'why' - with such rare clarity - in your recent video on practising scales.

    Nothing but love and admiration for BH - as a man and as a unique educator - and, personally, I have little time for styles (especially 'jazz' guitar styles) outside the music he champion s... but they do exist.

  17. #66

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    By now the argument is going off topic because you are stating things but refusing to explain what you mean.

    Surely if the system is such a great way to learn jazz then you guys can show me in some way? Take 16 bars of "I love you" or "All of You" and explain it according to the 6th dim system or demonstrate a great harmonization of the melody that you make using that.
    A while back I did this harmonization of part of My Romance using Barry's method which you may find of interest. But his system doesn't cover everything, I see it as a useful addition to my toolbox, not a replacement. For example, bar 26 of My Romance (not shown in this PDF, I didn't get that far) contains a sort of Dorian line which cannot be harmonised by Barry's method. I have been doing it using a sort of Wes Montgomery method instead, i.e. alternating Cm and F7 instead of the diminished chord. (Randy Vincent's drop 2 book has some useful alternatives for this scenario).

    Barry Harris chord movements - My Romance

  18. #67

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop View Post
    A while back I did this harmonization of part of My Romance using Barry's method which you may find of interest. But his system doesn't cover everything, I see it as a useful addition to my toolbox, not a replacement. For example, bar 26 of My Romance (not shown in this PDF, I didn't get that far) contains a sort of Dorian line which cannot be harmonised by Barry's method. I have been doing it using a sort of Wes Montgomery method instead, i.e. alternating Cm and F7 instead of the diminished chord. (Randy Vincent's drop 2 book has some useful alternatives for this scenario).

    Barry Harris chord movements - My Romance
    Thank you Graham! That was my point actually, you always have to run around and make odd choices when using 6th dim as a reference. And since it reduces to V and I it doesn't handle IV and II chords that well. I suggested the two songs with IVm chords because you often get into trouble with them too

    Nice arrangement! It's hard to really use the borrowed notes for inner voice movement on a tune as busy as that, which is what I always like about the Barry Harris stuff, but your example illustrates the harmonization and some of the options very well.

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  19. #68

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by destinytot View Post
    I like it as a system and as a tool, but I'm glad to see you put this into perspective.

    Without wishing to cross a line by being personal, I've watched some of your videos and I've been very impressed by your teaching. And on the subject of compelling argument, it was very refreshing to hear you say 'why' - with such rare clarity - in your recent video on practising scales.

    Nothing but love and admiration for BH - as a man and as a unique educator - and, personally, I have little time for styles (especially 'jazz' guitar styles) outside the music he champion s... but they do exist.
    Thank you Mike! That's very nice of you to say so! I flattered that you checked out the video!

    In all fairness to Christian I do like a good discussion and can get a bit lost in them because it's entertaining. Though I do stand by everything I've said about it as a system.

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  20. #69

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    Thank you Graham! That was my point actually, you always have to run around and make odd choices when using 6th dim as a reference. And since it reduces to V and I it doesn't handle IV and II chords that well. I suggested the two songs with IVm chords because you often get into trouble with them too

    Nice arrangement! It's hard to really use the borrowed notes for inner voice movement on a tune as busy as that, which is what I always like about the Barry Harris stuff, but your example illustrates the harmonization and some of the options very well.

    Jens
    What I do like about it is you basically only have to learn 2 sets of chords, i.e. 6th and diminished, which simplifies the whole way of looking at it. Before that I was struggling to put chord movements like this together, now it's a lot easier. I don't mind the limitations, I just work round them.

  21. #70

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    By now the argument is going off topic because you are stating things but refusing to explain what you mean.

    Surely if the system is such a great way to learn jazz then you guys can show me in some way? Take 16 bars of "I love you" or "All of You" and explain it according to the 6th dim system or demonstrate a great harmonization of the melody that you make using that.

    Don't just tell me that it goes really deep and can explain everything bebop or beyond functional harmony, why do I have to believe you if you don't want to explain it to me?

    For me the 6th dim thing was always just a framework for experimenting, so regardless of the key (I think the alt scale example from Graham illustrates that quite well?) You force a maj6 or min6 sound over a chord and then start experimenting with what sort of chords you can get out of it. That is also how I've seen Barry use it in the piano classes.

    You have to realize that I find that ok for a system, a lot of great music can be made like that, and I think it is fine tool for experimentation. I just don't like when it is turned into a grand unifying theory without any substantial argument as to why it is so great. That is my criticism.

    I am also not really happy with reducing II V I to V I because it makes you end up practicing your A7b9 to G7 lines in C. That said if you chose the right standard it can be a very good way to introduce and practice scales similar to what he demonstrates in the video and I have used that in lessons.

    Jens
    TBH Jens, it's because I cannot be bothered. I don't mean to be rude by saying this, it's more that I don't see the value in intellectually arguing something which I feel works very well for me and I enjoy exploring in my playing and I don't want to spend my time explaining something which is explained perfectly well in text books, videos and so on. The info is out there.

    Secondly: as I have said, my central area of study with BH's material has not been his harmony stuff. It's been the single note improvisation material. My harmonic stuff ATM is based on the usual stuff - drop harmony, standard voice leading, triads, a bit of CST intervallic stuff - not too much of Barry's stuff. So I feel ill-qualified to discuss Barry's harmony with you even if I felt motivated to do so. (But I do feel I can discuss the improvisation stuff.)

    Ask Graham, or Alan, they have a better grasp of the harmony material. But I do know that there is a long way you can go with it if you study it...

    Anyway It's not a grand unifying theory. It's not consistent in that way. If it's been presented to you that way, than that's inaccurate IMO.

    BTW I Love You (or any Cole Porter tunes) works beautifully with Barry's system, as I understand it.

    But in any case, I'm not terribly interested in winning over a convert. Either you get the bug for it, or you don't. You can't study everything. You play great. Why argue?
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-20-2016 at 02:57 PM.

  22. #71

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    In all fairness to Christian I do like a good discussion and can get a bit lost in them because it's entertaining.
    Well I'm certainly partial to a good argument. I'm sorry if I'm a bit disappointing on the Barry stuff. I suppose I feel it isn't really MY material that I sweated blood for - it's not something I worked out for myself, so I don't feel that sense of ownership that gives me that arguing spirit.

    Whereas with the harmonic minor stuff for example - I feel I worked all of that out myself, by transcribing and observing. It's different from being taught something top down.

    The BH stuff acts as an overarching framework I can slot everything into. It's a bit annoying in a way, because I had MY theory dammit :-)

    All I can say is that I like the BH stuff and there's a lot to it. Sorry :-)

    Happy to post up things I've been working on though, if it interests people.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-20-2016 at 03:04 PM.

  23. #72

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop View Post
    What I do like about it is you basically only have to learn 2 sets of chords, i.e. 6th and diminished, which simplifies the whole way of looking at it. Before that I was struggling to put chord movements like this together, now it's a lot easier. I don't mind the limitations, I just work round them.
    Actually I have another take on which 2 chords you can do a lot with in terms of harmonizing and comping, but more about this later this week...

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  24. #73

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    Actually I have another take on which 2 chords you can do a lot with in terms of harmonizing and comping, but more about this later this week...

    Jens
    I look forward to hearing...

  25. #74

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    TBH Jens, it's because I cannot be bothered. I don't mean to be rude by saying this, it's more that I don't see the value in intellectually arguing something which I feel works very well for me and I enjoy exploring in my playing and I don't want to spend my time explaining something which is explained perfectly well in text books, videos and so on. The info is out there.

    Secondly: as I have said, my central area of study with BH's material has not been his harmony stuff. It's been the single note improvisation material. My harmonic stuff ATM is based on the usual stuff - drop harmony, standard voice leading, triads, a bit of CST intervallic stuff - not too much of Barry's stuff. So I feel ill-qualified to discuss Barry's harmony with you even if I felt motivated to do so. (But I do feel I can discuss the improvisation stuff.)

    Ask Graham, or Alan, they have a better grasp of the harmony material. But I do know that there is a long way you can go with it if you study it...

    Anyway It's not a grand unifying theory. It's not consistent in that way. If it's been presented to you that way, than that's inaccurate IMO.

    BTW I Love You (or any Cole Porter tunes) works beautifully with Barry's system, as I understand it.
    So it is great and fantastic and it says so in books and does everything but you can't be bothered giving an example or explaining any of the things you have claimed in your earlier posts? There are some very heavy statements here and there

    The funny thing is that I find that there are things I take from it and use and like, I also don't think it would be too hard to make examples of this?

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    But in any case, I'm not terribly interested in winning over a convert. Either you get the bug for it, or you don't. You can't study everything. You play great. Why argue?
    Thanks man! Why Argue? Because I teach. I have had a lot of students walk in with 6th diminished stuff that was if not ruining then at the very least confusing how they understood tunes, harmony and basic things about making lines and melodies. That is something that I find really annoying with how this system is presented. It is passed of as a great theory from one of the real bebop cats and it explains everything but most people who try to use it can't and it isn't really coherent as a system. The fact that you refuse to go into details with any of it makes you look like one of those students, but that I can't really know from here.

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  26. #75

    User Info Menu

    I don't know anything about Barry's single-note stuff - would that be 'bebop scales' and the like? I never learned a bebop scale in my life, but I did study bebop solos by the greats and picked up ideas from that.

    As to his chord system, I don't think it's necessarily the right place to start for beginners. There's enough to get to grips with just learning the basic diatonic stuff. To me the BH stuff is something to add into the mix later. (about 30 years later in my case!)

  27. #76
    destinytot Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    Thank you Mike! That's very nice of you to say so! I flattered that you checked out the video!

    In all fairness to Christian I do like a good discussion and can get a bit lost in them because it's entertaining. Though I do stand by everything I've said about it as a system.

    Jens
    Not at all - thank you, Jens. I think you talk sense.

    I like a good discussion, too - but I don't find online discussion to be as satisfying as I find it (and as you describe it) entertaining.

    On the other hand, as MJ sang, "You gotta put your heart on the line if you wanna make it right."

    Because the heart has its own reasons which Reason doesn't know - even while BH and Uncle Wes (yes, I'll call him uncle) do.
    <em>

  28. #77

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    So it is great and fantastic and it says so in books and does everything but you can't be bothered giving an example or explaining any of the things you have claimed in your earlier posts? There are some very heavy statements here and there

    The funny thing is that I find that there are things I take from it and use and like, I also don't think it would be too hard to make examples of this?



    Thanks man! Why Argue? Because I teach. I have had a lot of students walk in with 6th diminished stuff that was if not ruining then at the very least confusing how they understood tunes, harmony and basic things about making lines and melodies. That is something that I find really annoying with how this system is presented. It is passed of as a great theory from one of the real bebop cats and it explains everything but most people who try to use it can't and it isn't really coherent as a system. The fact that you refuse to go into details with any of it makes you look like one of those students, but that I can't really know from here.

    Jens
    I see where you are coming from emotionally - I kind of get why you are annoyed, too. The 6th-diminished thing is poorly understood by a lot of people IMO and has generated a lot of confusion on the forums. But then that could be said of any theory.

    And anyone in jazz education is kind of in the business of selling things. This inevitable.

    So well OK, I don't know re the harmony stuff for sure because I haven't got that far with it.

    But having acquired the basics and moved towards understanding some the more complicated examples, as well as exploring the scales from the point of view of improvised two part counterpoint, I can see where I could go with it... That's what I mean about the movement thing - getting away from chords. There's more than one way of doing that, of course.

    The improvisation stuff is extending my language, or at least I'm having tremendous fun exploring it... I think it's a really good way of building language. TBH I don't care about any system any further than how interesting and useful I find it. There's lots of stuff on this forum that hasn't yet interested me, for example. Maybe one day it will, maybe not.

    I certainly don't expect consistency. I'm a musician, not a music theorist. I want things I can USE.

  29. #78

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop View Post
    I don't know anything about Barry's single-note stuff - would that be 'bebop scales' and the like? I never learned a bebop scale in my life, but I did study bebop solos by the greats and picked up ideas from that.

    As to his chord system, I don't think it's necessarily the right place to start for beginners. There's enough to get to grips with just learning the basic diatonic stuff. To me the BH stuff is something to add into the mix later. (about 30 years later in my case!)
    Yeah his stuff is really just a library of rules and ideas to go about creating lines. It includes what are called bebop scales by David Baker, but it goes a bit further into ways you can add notes and so on, depending on context. One of the things I like about it is that it is all about rhythm.

    It's not an overarching theory in the sense that CST is, and you can find similar groupings of stuff elsewhere, I'm sure, but I do find it addresses pretty much all the changes playing through standards I've come across really nicely.

    The 1-7-1 stuff alone is a terrific way to internalise changes. I like to sing through standards changes like this - it gives me the sound of the changes more easily than if I sing arpeggios, for example.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-20-2016 at 04:48 PM.

  30. #79

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    Actually I have another take on which 2 chords you can do a lot with in terms of harmonizing and comping, but more about this later this week...

    Jens
    I would like to hear more about this. I'm having a sort of 'Year of the Chord' currently!

  31. #80

    User Info Menu

    Is there a particular workshop of his online that is good to start with? Are there a few, and is there a 'good' order to watch them?

    To give you some 'current familiarity' context, I have a copy of Kingstone's book, and started working through it a bit. I recognize the "tonic voicing-diminished passing chord - tonic inversion - dim. passing chord - etc" pattern from Randy Vincent's drop-2 book, though I imagine I'll see some differences the further into the BH thing I get, and I know that's just the boiler-plate knowledge for getting the rest of it down.

  32. #81

    User Info Menu

    Roni Ben Hur's book Talk Jazz is a good place to start I think... EDIT: for the single note stuff...

  33. #82

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ghoststrat View Post
    Is there a particular workshop of his online that is good to start with? Are there a few, and is there a 'good' order to watch them?

    To give you some 'current familiarity' context, I have a copy of Kingstone's book, and started working through it a bit. I recognize the "tonic voicing-diminished passing chord - tonic inversion - dim. passing chord - etc" pattern from Randy Vincent's drop-2 book, though I imagine I'll see some differences the further into the BH thing I get, and I know that's just the boiler-plate knowledge for getting the rest of it down.
    If you want to get deeper with Barry Harris material, your best bet, apart from attending a number of his workshops in person is to pick up the Howard Rees Workshop videos. Incidentally, the second in the series features forum member Alan Kingstone on guitar:

    Howard Rees' Jazz Workshops | The Barry Harris Workshop Video
    Howard Rees' Jazz Workshops | The Barry Harris Workshop Video Part 2

    You may also want to check out David Berkman's recent Harmony book published by Chuck Sher which has a whole section devoted to Barry Harris. In the context of this thread, it's interesting that Berkman confesses to initially overlooking BH's methods but he's recently become fascinated by their implications.

    Like Christian, I found the most immediately useable aspects of the Rees videos to be line-related. One thing I grabbed and ran with was his idea of the chromatic major scale. Basically, it's a major scale filled out chromatically with a jump back to a previously heard diatonic note wherever a semitone would normally occur in the sequence. For example, a descending F major scale - F, E, D, C, Bb, A, G, F - where the semitones occur between F & E and Bb & A would be transformed into F, (G), E, (Eb), D, (Db), C, (B), Bb, (C), A, (Ab), G, (Gb), F. From this scale, I created a 'looped' ii-V-I exercise using a descending scale that covers the whole range of the guitar and starts on the 7th, 5th, 3rd and root notes respectively:

    Barry Harris &amp; Wes Montgomery-chromatic-major-scale-jpg

  34. #83

    User Info Menu

    nice post, PMB.
    "Ahhh - those Jazz guys are just makin' that stuff up!" - Homer Simpson

    "Anyone who understands Jazz knows that you can't understand it. It's too complicated. That's what's so simple about it." - Yogi Berra

  35. #84

    User Info Menu

    I want to post this here, because it is the most interesting thing I have come across for a long time.

    https://www.artofcomposing.com/aoc-0...eid=588aece28f

    According to this scholar, the important knowledge of great composers from the 'late baroque/early classical era' through to Nadia Boulanger's school was not in functional harmony or counterpoint, but in these 17th/18th century exercises called partimenti. Partimenti (according to this guy) were the key tool that equipped musicians to be able to improvise and compose very quickly according to a set of available licks and material by working from a bass progression. Sound familiar?

    According to him roman numeral analysis, sonata form and other classical theory tropes were essentially inventions of the 19th century academic music world. The great composers did not think in terms of functional harmony at all, according to him, but had a vast array of licks and vocabulary they could use to make music.

    I find the description of this reminds me of the way the Barry Harris system works (the guy in the podcast actually compares it to Aebersold patterns, he also talks about linguistics.)

    To me this is what actual jazz education is about - not about 'rules' or 'theory' but actual examples of language you can use right away.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-21-2016 at 10:59 AM.

  36. #85

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I want to post this here, because it is the most interesting thing I have come across for a long time.
    Thanks for posting this. Listening to it now. (More later.)
    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  37. #86

    User Info Menu

    Partimenti style : Instant Mozart


  38. #87

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop View Post
    Partimenti style : Instant Mozart
    Fascinating. Thanks for posting that.
    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  39. #88

    User Info Menu

    Thank you, everyone who posted responses to my question about the BH approach. I'm digging into it.

  40. #89

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    Actually I have another take on which 2 chords you can do a lot with in terms of harmonizing and comping, but more about this later this week...

    Jens
    Hi Jens - are you referring to min7 and min7b5 as in your latest YouTube lesson? I looked at the PDF. It's interesting, but I already know this approach from the Barry Harris method.

    Your drop 2 chords on the top 4 strings are the same voicings as Alan Kingstone's 'Barry Harris' chords and are applied in a similar way. i.e. his maj 6 shapes are the same as your min7 shapes, and his min6 shapes are the same as your min7b5 shapes (and are used in the same way to cover dominant, altered and min7b5 sounds).

    The only difference is that you are leaving out the diminished chords which Barry adds to create the steps between the main chords, if I add these in it's identical.
    Last edited by grahambop; 03-25-2016 at 05:01 AM.

  41. #90

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop View Post
    Hi Jens - are you referring to min7 and min7b5 as in your latest YouTube lesson? I looked at the PDF. It's interesting, but I already know this approach from the Barry Harris method.

    Your drop 2 chords on the top 4 strings are the same voicings as Alan Kingstone's 'Barry Harris' chords and are applied in a similar way. i.e. his maj 6 shapes are the same as your min7 shapes, and his min6 shapes are the same as your min7b5 shapes (and are used in the same way to cover dominant, altered and min7b5 sounds).

    The only difference is that you are leaving out the diminished chords which Barry adds to create the steps between the main chords, if I add these in it's identical.
    Thanks for checking out the video!! Makes my day that you do!

    I don't know Alan Kingstones book (I somehow managed to learn jazz almost completely without books ) I had a piano teacher and a guitar teacher point out that you could use these chords like that. It obviously works regardless of it being Drop2 voicings.

    The way it was presented to me was from looking at the upper part of dominant chords and Maj7(9) chords. I explain that in some of the altered scale lessons in a bit more detail because it is very useful to find an arpeggio over an altered dominant.

    Yes you could add a diminished chord to it and get minor and major 6th diminished scales and then use that as a foundation of thinking, but that would just clutter up the usefulness of this with a lot of extra theory that you wouldn't be using anyway when you are trying to play the chords.

    I don't know if I would really describe that is "the only difference" since it would kick out diatonic chords and disguise functions as suspensions etc.. But that is obviously just my opinion

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  42. #91

    User Info Menu

    Hi Jens - it sounds like a system I came up with - I think m7 and m6 personally... Got the idea from Charlie C.

    And yes, you can sequence it in with Barry stuff - (he would say 6 not m7...)

  43. #92

    User Info Menu


    London Jazz Guitar Society:
    www.meetup.com/londonjazzguitarsociety
    LJGS on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LDNJazzGuitar

  44. #93

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    Thanks for checking out the video!! Makes my day that you do!

    I don't know Alan Kingstones book (I somehow managed to learn jazz almost completely without books ) I had a piano teacher and a guitar teacher point out that you could use these chords like that. It obviously works regardless of it being Drop2 voicings.

    The way it was presented to me was from looking at the upper part of dominant chords and Maj7(9) chords. I explain that in some of the altered scale lessons in a bit more detail because it is very useful to find an arpeggio over an altered dominant.

    Yes you could add a diminished chord to it and get minor and major 6th diminished scales and then use that as a foundation of thinking, but that would just clutter up the usefulness of this with a lot of extra theory that you wouldn't be using anyway when you are trying to play the chords.

    I don't know if I would really describe that is "the only difference" since it would kick out diatonic chords and disguise functions as suspensions etc.. But that is obviously just my opinion

    Jens
    But to me they are just chords, I don't really mind whether they are called 6th or 7th, they can fit into different contexts so having got familiar with them, they become multi-purpose. So I don't think about theory or chord names much when I play, once I've got the sounds in my ears and the shapes under my fingers. Adding the diminished chords doesn't clutter it for me, it just fills in the gaps between the main chords. Again I am finding now that I know instinctively by ear when I want to grab a dim chord for a certain note or to fill a gap in the sequence, I don't have to think about the theory.

  45. #94

    User Info Menu

    By 'only difference' I just meant that if I add diminished chords in between your sequence of drop 2s on the top 4 strings, the result is identical to the maj 6 dim chord scale in Alan's book, even to the exact voicings used.

  46. #95

    User Info Menu

    Military bop scales! 'Give me 20 Dominant scales from the 3rd with 3 added half steps, soldier!'


  47. #96

    User Info Menu

    I like the way he refers to gigs as 'performing musical missions as a saxophonist.'

  48. #97

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop View Post
    But to me they are just chords, I don't really mind whether they are called 6th or 7th, they can fit into different contexts so having got familiar with them, they become multi-purpose. So I don't think about theory or chord names much when I play, once I've got the sounds in my ears and the shapes under my fingers. Adding the diminished chords doesn't clutter it for me, it just fills in the gaps between the main chords. Again I am finding now that I know instinctively by ear when I want to grab a dim chord for a certain note or to fill a gap in the sequence, I don't have to think about the theory.
    It doesn't clutter it for you because you like the dim chords in between and already know the scale and how it sounds that takes time...

    I am trying to teach people that with 2 voicings they can play a lot of different chords. I am not trying to teach the scale. If that is the goal then teaching them 2 scales they have never heard of is not important and would just be in the way.

    Surely you can see that the principle stands well on it's own with out any mention of 6th dim stuff? (it is after all older than the 6th dim scale)

    You should also be aware that the dim chord sound is connected to one style or period and does not fit in all genres of jazz, which can't be said for the voicing idea. You're probably not going to hear a lot of 6th dim from McCoy or Hancock.

    Jens
    jenslarsen.nl --- My YouTube Channel with lessons and live videos--- YT Lesson Facebook page --- Træben album: Storm on itunes

    I endorse Ibanez guitars, John Daw Custom picks and QSC monitors

  49. #98

    User Info Menu



    edit: reg. the musical mission specialist
    Last edited by joe2758; 03-25-2016 at 08:42 AM.

  50. #99

    User Info Menu

    Actually joking aside, this video covers the BH approach to improvisation in a really through way, using more familiar jazz edu language. Quite dry though - I'd have fallen asleep in that lecture haha...

  51. #100

    User Info Menu

    yeah man I couldn't get past the first 3-4 minutes. reminded me too much of work