The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 209
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevebol
    G F E D C# is just half-diminshed. Bb A G sounds like a lick. A lead in to a G7 or Gm chord.
    That's how I hear it.

    ......G F E D.....................C#......................Bb A G
    (G half-dim scale) (C# dim chord) (lick leading into G7 chord)

    I try to relate everything to chord shapes.
    That's not the harmonic context these notes appear in. They are usually used over an A7b9 going to Dm when used by Parker.

    Edit - so the next note might be an f on beat 1 of the next bar if that makes any sense.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-17-2016 at 05:49 AM.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    I don't want to argue either. Let's say we talked past each other and let it go.

    As for the question about the notes G F E D C# Bb A G, no, I would not think of them as a scale. But that's me. I don't think that way.

    To be clear, I don't consider myself an exemplary player and am not suggesting what I happen to do is of any general interest. I have learned a lot from Herb Ellis and he did know scales but he played MAINLY (his word) out of chord shapes and that's how he thought and how he organized the fretboard. I find that approach congenial. You find your approach congenial. Good for both of us, I say.
    How would you analyse something like that out of interest? Upper neighbour tones decorating a descending A7b9 arpeggio?

    Incidentally I used to be an entirely chordal/arpeggio soloist in the Charlie christian tradition and it was actually this type of lick that got me thinking about scales again, simply because I figured if it barks and has a waggly tail I may as well call it a dog.

    Cc afaik doesn't play this type of thing and as a result I daresay herb probably wouldn't either - not that I've transcribe any herb tbh. Very common in horn players and pianists of the bop era though, not just Parker....

    there are few runs that look like scales in Christians music. But there are some - The ear is drawn to scales whether it knows what they are or not.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-17-2016 at 05:23 AM.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    This is a great thread; it's impossible to try to get into the detail that has come up, but...my take on a few points

    - on a ii-V , Parker droppd the ii. Joe Pass and many others followed Parker on this - Joe says as much on video, this is one of the key sounds of bebop ... this is what BH teaches on his courses (among other things)

    - on the ii-V Wes highlighted the ii. This is one of the things that give him his post-bop sound. I have never heard a solo by Wes that I would really call straight ahead bop (and I have bought and own over 95% of his officially recorded material). Pat Martino took this concept and developed it into a total method (which he reveals in his educational videos)

    - the bebop scale(s) as taught in guitar books is/are just a tiny fraction of CP's "bebop scales": all CP was trying to do was to get the chord tones on downbeats when playing 8ths (by inserting other notes in the line); if you really want to get into that in detail the Omnibook is the best place to go; this is also taught on BH's courses

    - BH is a bop theorist and purist, the best there is, a truly fantastic bop educator

    - the only comment I've heard BH make about Wes is where he criticises Wes's harmonisation of Stella

    - the only comments I've read by Wes about Coltrane are highly positive

    - BH has stated that he believes Coltrane (and Miles) damaged "the music", well yes of course they did - they destroyed bop! But they had previously both been masters of it of course.

    - I'm a great lover of both Wes and Coltrane, but I would hate to hear them play together. Wes is reputed to have joined JC's band for a few weeks in 63 "as an extra" including the Monterey festival, there is no offical record of this session (but that doesn't mean it won't turn up on youtube sometime!) or any other Wes-JC session.
    Last edited by sunnysideup; 03-17-2016 at 05:59 AM.

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by sunnysideup
    This is a great thread; it's impossible to try to get into the detail that has come up, but...my take on a few points

    - on a ii-V , Parker droppd the ii. Joe Pass and many others followed Parker on this - Joe says as much on video, this is one of the key sounds of bebop ... this is what BH teaches on his courses (among other things)

    - on the ii-V Wes highlighted the ii. This is one of the things that give him his post-bop sound. I have never heard a solo by Wes that I would really call straight ahead bop (and I have bought and own over 95% of his officially recorded material). Pat Martino took this concept and developed it into a total method (which he reveals in his educational videos)

    - the bebop scale(s) as taught in guitar books is/are just a tiny fraction of CP's "bebop scales": all CP was trying to do was to get the chord tones on downbeats when playing 8ths (by inserting other notes in the line); if you really want to get into that in detail the Omnibook is the best place to go; this is also taught on BH's courses

    - BH is a bop theorist and purist, the best there is, a truly fantastic bop educator

    - the only comment I've heard BH make about Wes is where he criticises Wes's harmonisation of Stella

    - the only comments I've read by Wes about Coltrane are highly positive

    - BH has stated that he believes Coltrane (and Miles) damaged "the music", well yes of course they did - they destroyed bop! But they had previously both been masters of it of course.

    - I'm a great lover of both Wes and Coltrane, but I would hate to hear them play together. Wes is reputed to have joined JC's band for a few weeks in 63 "as an extra" including the Monterey festival, there is no offical record of this festival (but that doesn't mean it won't turn up on youtube sometime!) or any other Wes-JC session.
    What about the Harold land session above as an example of early very bop wes? Sounds bop to me, ymmv.

    I'll have to think about that re bird... Bird used a lot of ways of getting into a chord (ie playing the dominant), but he was a big fan of m7b5 and maj7 (b7) sounds over dominant chords. So Bm7b5 or Fmaj7 on G7... Not sure if I can think of an example of him using a Dm7 sound off the top of my head now you mention it. Dm11, yes.

    I hear a huge amount of birds language in wes of course, and it seems wes particularly liked the floaty maj7 and extended major sounds on everything. Flat 7 on dominant a lot....

    Not certain I'd agree that Bird was trying to get the chord tones on the downbeat.

    I'd have agreed if you were talking about Bud!
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-17-2016 at 06:22 AM.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    The Harold Land session and the preceding album with Nat Adderley are the 2 boppiest sessions that Wes was involved with; but I don't hear Wes playing bop lines on these albums - I hear him playing post bop lines.

    If I compare Wes's playing on this album to bop guitarists like Tal, Jimmy Raney, some JP, I hear something very different, even on these recordings.

    The comments about Parker's "bebop scale", and his dropping the ii in a ii V are straight out of Barrys Harris's teaching, which confirmed what I'd figured out for myself after two years of the Omnibook.


    But we all have different ears ;-)

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Look I'm not trying to argue the toss for the sake of making a point, but I still don't think you understand what I mean.

    If you were to analyse the notes G F E D C# Bb A G - for example, would you not think of this as a scale? I think it would be a bit perverse not to.

    This is the sort of stuff I'm talking about. (I could get you exact examples if you wanted but I'm away atm so have to wait a couple of days.) I'm not talking about bebop scales or added note scales or any of that stuff.

    Setting aside bird and his unknowable process (although bird certainly practiced scales because there is a recording of him doing it), would you not think Mark Levine author of a book primarily concerned with the application of scales might think 'y'know that scale with the augmented second in it, that doesn't half ring a bell? What could it be?'

    I wouldn't then write a book (a standard text!) stating that jazz musicians rarely use the harmonic minor scale when there are such hilariously glaring counter examples in the core repertoire no less.

    This is what I found a bit weird. Especially given he can no doubt kick my ass at bebop. *shrugs*

    I choose to analyse the line above as a D harmonic minor scale run starting on a G and would work very nicely over a A7b9 chord going to Dm. I think that's a pretty streamlined understanding provided you know what a harmonic minor scale is (which I presume Mark Levine does :-))

    (In fact I would use the C dominant scale raise 1 now... A less streamlined understanding but pretty useful one in many ways)
    It's hard to know exactly what Parker was thinking when playing that run but regardless, it clearly is a descending D harmonic minor scale from the 4th degree (or a descending G Dorian #4 if you want to think modally which seems highly unlikely in Parker's case). To argue otherwise, one would have to place equal doubt that Parker ever employed the major scale!

    Regardless, this line certainly pops up a lot in Parker's improvisations along with a few variations. Commonly, he pivots from the third up to the b9th degree or reverses direction at the end to resolve chromatically to the 5th rather than b3 of the minor chord as illustrated below.

    For me, the most interesting aspect of this and many other of Parker's pet figures is that they operate within an economy of means (I almost wrote an economy of scale :-)). I've shown a series of possible ways to describe the line harmonically. The opening note (G) operates as either the b7 of the A7b9, the b3 of Em7b5, the root of a Gm6, the 13th of a Bb13 or the 5th of a Cmaj7. All of these examples treat the following minor chord as the point of arrival except for the last where the minor is more likely to be heard as the ii chord within a I-VI-ii-V-I progression:

    Barry Harris & Wes Montgomery-cp-line-jpg

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    @sunnysideup Sure - in fact the bh stuff now forms the framework of my understanding of bop.

    But I've never come across unambiguous examples of a bh style added note scale in parkers stuff (but my knowledge is only based on the stuff I've transcribed, I'd be interested if you referenced an example from the omnibook...)

    On the other hand I transcribed bud on Celia and I was like Aha!

    In practice I use the BH stuff in my playing all the time.... It personally took me a long time to grasp the advantages and sophistication of the approach although I went to my first bh workshops a decade ago.

    In terms of dropping the ii on a ii v, Barry harris scale based improv approach has all of the possibilities the op mentioned within the dominant scales and the various tools you can use to generate material (scales with added notes, thirds, stacks of thirds (arps), pivots and so on.)

    So by using bh approach you are encapsulating the ii and v (as well as the vii and iv) under one thing - the V dominant scale...

    So it's more a mental process than what you hear in terms of notes.

    But different teachers and players use different language (family of four, T/D etc) for the same things. The bh system to my mind gives you the most flexibility and the most melodic approach to improv while still making sure you play the changes.

    I know some guys here have an allergic reaction to scale based improvisation and I know exactly how they feel, but thing that marks out the Barry harris approach IMO is it actually gives you a tool set for creating convincing language from scales.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-17-2016 at 08:16 AM.

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    Thanks PMB for putting my point concisely with proper musical examples.

    It still doesn't answer the question what was Levine smoking when he wrote the Jazz Theory Book (and where can I get some?) :-)

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    @Christian, this is getting silly

    "But I've never come across unambiguous examples of a bh style added note scale in parkers stuff (but my knowledge is only based on the stuff I've transcribed, I'd be interested if you referenced an example from the omnibook...)"

    try the first 2 bars of the Donna head, possibly the most quoted and recognisable head in bop.

    There are thousands (literally) of other examples.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    Yeah, I did think of that soon after I posted. Disputed authorship though.

    I actually believe Miles. Donna Lee seems kind of less rhythmically inventive than the other Parker heads I know and a lot more scalic, which fits in with miles early style of improv.

    Any others?

    Actually Donna Lee is practically a case study in Barry harris material. I learned a lot working through that head. It's got everything...

    Please understand that I am not disputing the usefulness of the BH system applied to Birds music, more that I haven't really noticed this type of added note scale use much in his music... Personally I like the added note scale thing and use it to death.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-17-2016 at 09:04 AM.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Actually Sippin at Bells has a nice example doesn't it? But you do get several types of chromaticism in the first few bars... It's not all added note scale rule stuff iirc... I think there's a few ways you could analyse that stuff - chord tones/passing tones.

    In terms of analysing added note scale stuff, the difference between using chord tone/diatonic and chromatic passing tone combinations and added note scales is pretty hazy... It's probably good to have both concepts at your disposal...

    Also while I agree that Bird was perfectly able to play chord tones on the beat, often he was actually subverting the expectation and putting chord tones on anticipations. Use of double anticipations in particular I find very characteristic and much rarer in pre bop jazz.

    I do think BH is more modelled on Bud Powell than bird, which would make sense.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-17-2016 at 09:04 AM.

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by PMB
    For me, the most interesting aspect of this and many other of Parker's pet figures is that they operate within an economy of means (I almost wrote an economy of scale :-)).
    Thomas Owens talks about this in his chapter on Parker in his book "Bebop: The Music and its Players." Very much worth reading. I've got to go by the library today and if the book is on the shelves, I'll pick it up. There's something I want to say here but I fear getting it wrong so I want to double-check first.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    "But lying beneath the surface of most of [Charlie Parker's] improvisations is another factor that helps generate the sense of rightness in his music. Typically entire phrases, and even entire choruses and groupings of choruses, are goal-oriented; they arrive on a final note that lies at the end of a lengthy stepwise descent.... the great majority of his solos contain extensive sections of scalar descent; they are among the most striking elements in his musical vocabulary..."

    Thomas Owens, "Bebop: The Music and its Players", pages 36 and 37. (An 11-bar section of "The Closer" is used as an example, as well as two typical Parker phrases over a V7b9 i.)

    Some "folding over" (an octave leap, for example) was required to keep a lengthy descent within the alto saxophone's range. (A similar descent on, say, a guitar or piano would not require the same folding over, though the folding over might be an advantage in that the lines may sound less pre-determined that way.)

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    How would you analyse something like that out of interest? Upper neighbour tones decorating a descending A7b9 arpeggio?

    Incidentally I used to be an entirely chordal/arpeggio soloist in the Charlie christian tradition and it was actually this type of lick that got me thinking about scales again, simply because I figured if it barks and has a waggly tail I may as well call it a dog.

    Cc afaik doesn't play this type of thing and as a result I daresay herb probably wouldn't either - not that I've transcribe any herb tbh. Very common in horn players and pianists of the bop era though, not just Parker....

    there are few runs that look like scales in Christians music. But there are some - The ear is drawn to scales whether it knows what they are or not.
    It's a guess but I think the early boppers were huge on using bit's of the half diminished scale. There's the enclosure. Say G as the target note;

    G#, F#, G

    Another kind of enclosure;

    A#, F#, A, G

    Django and Bird did that a lot. To Django maybe it was just a lick. In bop it might be a lick based on a half-diminished scale. Not sure. I don't find this too confusing. We organize things the way we have to. What get's me is the odd leaps in bop. Lot's of 4th and 6ths.
    I can't make heads or tails of it.

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    You folks are perpetuating a myth. There is nothing in the so called "Barry Harris" approach that didn't already have a precedent in music. The "dim 6th" scale concept is just being clever, but nothing new.

    Bach showed us 300 years ago:

    Last edited by rintincop; 03-17-2016 at 02:53 PM.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    You folks are perpetuating a myth. There is nothing in the so called "Barry Harris" approach that didn't already have a precedent in music. The "dim 6th" scale concept is just being clever, but nothing new.

    Bach showed us 300 years ago:
    Barry never takes credit for the Sixth Diminished scale, only the naming of it. Many times I've heard him credit Bach, Beethoven, Chopin as using the scale.

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevebol
    It's a guess but I think the early boppers were huge on using bit's of the half diminished scale. There's the enclosure. Say G as the target note;

    G#, F#, G

    Another kind of enclosure;

    A#, F#, A, G

    Django and Bird did that a lot. To Django maybe it was just a lick. In bop it might be a lick based on a half-diminished scale. Not sure. I don't find this too confusing. We organize things the way we have to. What get's me is the odd leaps in bop. Lot's of 4th and 6ths.
    I can't make heads or tails of it.
    Sorry I'm not quite with you. What do you mean by half diminished scale?

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    Myth? What myth? Am I perpetuating it? I'm confused.

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Sorry I'm not quite with you. What do you mean by half diminished scale?
    Half step, whole step, half step, whole step, etc.....
    Or start with a whole step instead of half. For the sake of organization I call diminished, half-diminished, whole tone and chromatic- linear. Linear movement through the octave.
    That's just me.

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevebol
    Half step, whole step, half step, whole step, etc.....
    Or start with a whole step instead of half. For the sake of organization I call diminished, half-diminished, whole tone and chromatic- linear. Linear movement through the octave.
    That's just me.
    Ah ok. I just call it half whole or whole half. Some call it diminished...

    I don't know if I'd credit any of the swing or early bop cats with using that scale outright from the stuff I've looked at... Or at least I've never noticed it.

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    "But lying beneath the surface of most of [Charlie Parker's] improvisations is another factor that helps generate the sense of rightness in his music. Typically entire phrases, and even entire choruses and groupings of choruses, are goal-oriented; they arrive on a final note that lies at the end of a lengthy stepwise descent.... the great majority of his solos contain extensive sections of scalar descent; they are among the most striking elements in his musical vocabulary..."

    Thomas Owens, "Bebop: The Music and its Players", pages 36 and 37. (An 11-bar section of "The Closer" is used as an example, as well as two typical Parker phrases over a V7b9 i.)

    Some "folding over" (an octave leap, for example) was required to keep a lengthy descent within the alto saxophone's range. (A similar descent on, say, a guitar or piano would not require the same folding over, though the folding over might be an advantage in that the lines may sound less pre-determined that way.)
    The example you cited (The Closer) is a perfect example of how Parker could use the descending scale not just as foreground material but as a 'submerged' resource offering further variation. Maybe that's one reason he was attracted to Bach whose fugues operate on a similar principle. For a more detailed discussion of Parker's musical thinking, I'd suggest checking out Owens' exhaustive 1974 thesis.

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by PMB
    The example you cited (The Closer) is a perfect example of how Parker could use the descending scale not just as foreground material but as a 'submerged' resource offering further variation. Maybe that's one reason he was attracted to Bach whose fugues operate on a similar principle. For a more detailed discussion of Parker's musical thinking, I'd suggest checking out Owens' exhaustive 1974 thesis.
    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.

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar
    yes, i agree. bird did *not* ditch the II chord in a II V and only played off the dom chord (see bar 2 of moose the mooche). he did use the bebop scale, there are examples of the pure form (blues fast). but it would seem that he was more fond of 9 b9 R 7 for unaltered dom chords. the 7 maj7 R movement is often used as a double chromatic approach for altered dom chords, he might say b3 | 3 b9 7 maj7 R .
    Not sure if I'm with you on those examples - could you give them in C major (don't know where you are taking your intervals from)

    Again I just want to point out - in my understanding - that just because Barry says ditch the ii chord - it doesn't mean that you then only play V.

    Barry is thinking about a whole scale on V and there are many ways you can use it including the ii minor, b7 (IV) subs and everything else. For example, this line (that I think of as a Parker type thing) would be part of this dominant world:

    Over Dm7 G7 C, which we simplify to G dominant scale resolving to C

    G F# F A C E | D

    (chromatic added note to place F, a chord tone on the beat, followed by a stack of thirds, followed a to the 9th of the C chord, beat 1)

    Here we are using notes from the G dominant scale in a way consistent with Barry's guidelines for line construction we can stretch this line out in various ways if we want.

    It's just a way of reducing the amount of 'changes following' you do and making things more open and melodic while retaining the essential harmonic function of the underlying progression. It's not about running bop scales over everything, although you can certainly do that too.

    What I have learned is that from the perspective of bop a cadence is a cadence.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-19-2016 at 09:41 AM.

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar
    i'm talking about dominant chords and the dominant scale. the key is not relevant.
    When you say b9 for example do you mean b9 within the key centre (I chord) or b9 over say a V7 chord?

    I presume the latter actually as you specify maj7...
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-19-2016 at 09:44 AM.

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar
    i'm talking about dominant chords and the dominant scale. the key is not relevant.
    Also from your use of the terms - bebop scale - and your use of 'b9' instead of 'b2' I'm guessing that you are not a full on Barry-ite, would that be fair to say?

    This isn't aimed at you dortmundjazzguitar - and I don't want to make out that Barry's approach is the only or even best way to study bebop, but when people start talking about his stuff without going into in some depth of the materials, people get a VERY stereotyped idea of what he's about.

    The maj6-dim/'bebop' scale confusion and this whole thing about 'dropping the ii' is a case in point. There's a lot more to it.

    Perhaps the best thing I can do is try and put his ideas into more familiar terms sometimes. BH has a certain way of discussing stuff that isn't always familiar. You can't 'half learn' his stuff, it's a whole system on its own.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-19-2016 at 10:26 AM.