Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Posts 101 to 150 of 211
  1. #101

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JensL View Post
    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
    Sure, agreed. At the end of the day it's all about getting a few chord shapes/types to cover lots of different possibilities.
    I wouldn't necessarily want to dive into the BH stuff from the start, I think it's something to explore later (as in my case).

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #102

    User Info Menu

    You know I was checking out this solo and it's amazing how much Django learned from the Barry Harris improvisation DVD. Scales with added notes, use of important triads over the dominant, a hefty minor six tritone sub.

    He's a sly old ultrafox, but I know what he got his ideas. Ha!


  4. #103

    User Info Menu

    I've only recently stumbled upon Barry Harris's ideas and watched a number of his videos. Aside from his beautiful music, I actually like that he's so opinionated. Students of jazz are often made to feel they should embrace the whole "progress" of jazz with equal reverence. It seems to be a pretty heavy expectation. What if you were to join a place like Berkeley today and happened not to like a lot of stuff as of Coltrane and McCoy Tyner , but had a love of Nat King Cole? Wouldn't that make you a pariah from the get-go?

  5. #104

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by m_d View Post
    I've only recently stumbled upon Barry Harris's ideas and watched a number of his videos. Aside from his beautiful music, I actually like that he's so opinionated. Students of jazz are often made to feel they should embrace the whole "progress" of jazz with equal reverence. It seems to be a pretty heavy expectation. What if you were to join a place like Berkeley today and happened not to like a lot of stuff as of Coltrane and McCoy Tyner , but had a love of Nat King Cole? Wouldn't that make you a pariah from the get-go?
    I love opinionated people! I find people with no opinions rather dull :-)

    Actually you are describing a lot of my friends and colleagues, many of them below the age of 30.

    I know one excellent young guitar player - and complete straight ahead nazi - currently doing the rounds on the London Jazz scene who left college without completing it, on realising that he had no interest in what they were teaching. I wish I'd had such presence of mind (and ability!) at such a tender age. Some other highly impressive young swing and bop players have never been near a music college.

    Others stick with it to get the piece of paper. Plenty of avid boppers have had to sit through classes on Kenny Wheeler harmony to get a pass. (OTOH many contemporary guys have been bored by bop classes.)

    For myself - I'm not so focussed, and I'm not necessarily into recreating the past. I love different kinds of music. But I feel that the BH thing is a great thing to explore, like counterpoint or tonal harmony. I find it interesting and rewarding.

    One thing I've noticed - 10 years or so ago, people used to laugh when I talked about Barry Harris's ideas as if he was a dotty old has-been or just didn't know who he is. Now people are taking notice.
    Last edited by christianm77; 05-29-2016 at 09:58 AM.

  6. #105

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    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...
    I'd like to have that handout. I love handouts. I always get the handouts before the presentation starts, read them through before the presentation starts (-or skim each section, if that is all that time permits) and make notes during the presentation, and actually not look at the person talking, which can be distracting.
    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  7. #106

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I love opinionated people! I find people with no opinions rather dull :-)

    Actually you are describing a lot of my friends and colleagues, many of them below the age of 30.

    I know one excellent young guitar player - and complete straight ahead nazi - currently doing the rounds on the London Jazz scene who left college without completing it, on realising that he had no interest in what they were teaching. I wish I'd had such presence of mind (and ability!) at such a tender age. Some other highly impressive young swing and bop players have never been near a music college.

    Others stick with it to get the piece of paper. Plenty of avid boppers have had to sit through classes on Kenny Wheeler harmony to get a pass. (OTOH many contemporary guys have been bored by bop classes.)

    For myself - I'm not so focussed, and I'm not necessarily into recreating the past. I love different kinds of music. But I feel that the BH thing is a great thing to explore, like counterpoint or tonal harmony. I find it interesting and rewarding.

    One thing I've noticed - 10 years or so ago, people used to laugh when I talked about Barry Harris's ideas as if he was a dotty old has-been or just didn't know who he is. Now people are taking notice.
    That is so interesting! A revolt within the ranks of the young guard. More than once, I've been reading about respectable musicians lamenting that the Bird succession wasn't as profuse as the Coltrane succession. I'm not qualified to say which is "right", but I know my tastes, and I'm too old to pretend to like something I don't, just because a professor or a critic says I should, even though I may respect it. I've yet to hear a modern pianist who's "better" than Nat King Cole on his jazz recordings; there isn't, to my ears; the guy was simply extraordinary.

    I'm outside the professional music world, basically a home learner, with a wild dream to have a band some day playing the Great American Songbook the way it's "supposed to be". Barry Harris's playing speaks for itself. In one clip it was very interesting, the audience is a friendly, but mainstream one. He has them singing and even crying, literally in the palm of his hands. Some criticisms I've read of the Barry Harris guitar method have struck me as ill-willed and unfair; endless complaining about a lack of indications about how to apply it to the ii-V-I framework, whereas a cursory glance (I just acquired the book) revealed at least two places where the author explains how to do just that. It probably has its limitations and contradictions, but some people pass judgment on it without even trying it apparently.

  8. #107

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by m_d View Post
    That is so interesting! A revolt within the ranks of the young guard. More than once, I've been reading about respectable musicians lamenting that the Bird succession wasn't as profuse as the Coltrane succession. I'm not qualified to say which is "right", but I know my tastes, and I'm too old to pretend to like something I don't, just because a professor or a critic says I should, even though I may respect it. I've yet to hear a modern pianist who's "better" than Nat King Cole on his jazz recordings; there isn't, to my ears; the guy was simply extraordinary.

    I'm outside the professional music world, basically a home learner, with a wild dream to have a band some day playing the Great American Songbook the way it's "supposed to be". Barry Harris's playing speaks for itself. In one clip it was very interesting, the audience is a friendly, but mainstream one. He has them singing and even crying, literally in the palm of his hands. Some criticisms I've read of the Barry Harris guitar method have struck me as ill-willed and unfair; endless complaining about a lack of indications about how to apply it to the ii-V-I framework, whereas a cursory glance (I just acquired the book) revealed at least two places where the author explains how to do just that. It probably has its limitations and contradictions, but some people pass judgment on it without even trying it apparently.
    My wife and I have been to see Barry play on a number of occasions. He's one of the jazz musicians I could take anyone to see whether they are a fan or not. Going to his gigs has taught me so much about how a musician can communicate with an audience. That's probably a more valuable lesson than any stuff about diminished-major 6 scales!

    Anyway, we also feel the same about Bill Frisell, so for me this is not an old school/new school thing - it's just about someone's spirit and whether they are interested in communicating and playing music for the audience. Bill is so shy, and yet he comes across with tremendous warmth. Although Bill knows his history!

    In fact, I had a Jim Hall marathon yesterday, and Jim was such a swing cat, it did make me question the validity of playing bebop. Bebop on the guitar to me sounds a bit like a dog standing on its hind legs to me even when Pass, Farlow, Rainey and Martino do it about as well as it can be done :-) But I'll practice it anyway.

    I think the lineage of Lester is a big one, transmitted through Charlie Christian, Jim Hall etc. I think some of the young cats are getting really into that.

    Anyway, speaking of Nat Cole, a guy I play with introduced me to this trio, have you heard it?
    Last edited by christianm77; 05-30-2016 at 05:56 AM.

  9. #108

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    My wife and I have been to see Barry play on a number of occasions. He's one of the jazz musicians I could take anyone to see whether they are a fan or not. Going to his gigs has taught me so much about how a musician can communicate with an audience. That's probably a more valuable lesson than any stuff about diminished-major 6 scales!

    Anyway, we also feel the same about Bill Frisell, so for me this is not an old school/new school thing - it's just about someone's spirit and whether they are interested in communicating and playing music for the audience. Bill is so shy, and yet he comes across with tremendous warmth. Although Bill knows his history!

    In fact, I had a Jim Hall marathon yesterday, and Jim was such a swing cat, it did make me question the validity of playing bebop. Bebop on the guitar to me sounds a bit like a dog standing on its hind legs to me even when Pass, Farlow, Rainey and Martino do it about as well as it can be done :-) But I'll practice it anyway.

    I think the lineage of Lester is a big one, transmitted through Charlie Christian, Jim Hall etc. I think some of the young cats are getting really into that.


    Anyway, speaking of Nat Cole, a guy I play with introduced me to this trio, have you heard it?
    I havn't heard it but will, thanks for the introduction. The After Midnight album hasn't left the top five spots in my music app for the past 6 months. So he made an album with Lester Young? I'm gonna have to explore his discography more in depth.
    It wasn't my intention to make this into an old school/new school contest either, it just seems to me the new school "loses it" more often than not. Frisell is on my list of "moderns" I'm reassessing and an album purchase is in my plans.

  10. #109

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by m_d View Post
    I havn't heard it but will, thanks for the introduction. The After Midnight album hasn't left the top five spots in my music app for the past 6 months. So he made an album with Lester Young? I'm gonna have to explore his discography more in depth.
    It wasn't my intention to make this into an old school/new school contest either, it just seems to me the new school "loses it" more often than not. Frisell is on my list of "moderns" I'm reassessing and an album purchase is in my plans.
    Yup - and there's no bass - just Nat's left hand and Buddy Rich. Swings like crazy.

    (Of course according to Ethan Iverson Buddy Rich isn't a real jazz drummer right? ;-))

    Well while we are on the no bass vibe - I'd check out Frisell's version of Benny's Bugle on Beautiful Dreamer...

    I think the problem I have with 'new school' jazz is that I rarely enjoy guys playing originals as much as standards, but they kind of have to play originals to get anywhere with touring, recording, publishing and so on... There are exceptions though, of course...
    Last edited by christianm77; 05-30-2016 at 07:23 AM.

  11. #110

    User Info Menu

    interesting that you have such a negative attitude to be-bop guitar c77:

    it can be done - just not very well

    i'm sympathetic to this picture i have to say (however much it does my head in after putting so much into trying to play be-bop guitar for 25 years or so)

    i think Raney and Pass at their best make it work

    but i typically feel that jim hall does better by taking a different tack (jimmy giuffre etc.)

    and the master - wes - is surely not a bebop guitarist (however fabulously sophisticated his 'vocabulary' is)

    ---

    in the end wes is so steeped in be-bop that - however original his mature style - it seems to me to show that properly modern jazz guitar can work a treat.

    ---

    i haven't heard anyone sound anything like say bud powell's right hand on guitar. i see no reason why something like that (without the absurd virtuosity of course) could not work very well. and barry harris is the man to help people to it.
    Last edited by Groyniad; 05-31-2016 at 07:19 PM.

  12. #111

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Groyniad View Post
    interesting that you have such a negative attitude to be-bop guitar c77:

    it can be done - just not very well

    i'm sympathetic to this picture i have to say (however much it does my head in after putting so much into trying to play be-bop guitar for 25 years or so)

    i think Raney and Pass at their best make it work

    but i typically feel that jim hall does better by taking a different tack (jimmy giuffre etc.)

    and the master - wes - is surely not a bebop guitarist (however fabulously sophisticated his 'vocabulary' is)

    ---

    in the end wes is so steeped in be-bop that - however original his mature style - it seems to me to show that properly modern jazz guitar can work a treat.

    ---

    i haven't heard anyone sound anything like say bud powell's right hand on guitar. i see no reason why something like that (without the absurd virtuosity of course) could not work very well. and barry harris is the man to help people to it.
    I wouldn't say negative exactly as it's the main thing I practice. More conflicted :-) I feel drawn to practicing bebop ideas and language, but at the same time I am not terribly interested in the great bop guitar players - I like the horn players and the pianists. But that's bop really. Not so much guitar music.

    I think Pasquale Grasso gets pretty close to the Bud Powell thing in on guitar. And yes, BH helped him.

    Also I think there is such a thing as playing bop language with a very contemporary guitar sensibility. I feel PG is actually this to an extent - his sheer level of technique I think is quite new - but I hear a lot of bop in Gilad's lines, for example. The development in electric guitar technique makes it possible to play with the fluency and legato I often feel a bit lacking in the older bop players.

    TBH I'm very conflicted about my direction as a player - I'm very eclectic, as you an see from my videos. I'm uncomfortably aware that this means I will probably never be as good a a) contemporary b) bop or c) swing player as I could be, but I really don't want to specialise. I kind of want to play my thing, but it's hard to know what that is from the inside.

    London sometimes seems like a town of specialists to me, people trying to recreate records. I just want to improvise, listen and play music really, and trying and find my own voice. It's pretty confusing.

    In practice I play a lot swing gigs, but without the interest in either modern gypsy jazz or vintage authenticity which seem like the obvious paths to take with that music. I've fallen into it. So I guess I'll keep trying to be as eclectic as possible while keeping the core of my musicianship as more-or-less changes based jazz and see where that takes me.

    That said, I feel like I learn a tremendous amount from purists, in whatever style. They can really roast you. I got roasted on the gig tonight! Very interesting.

  13. #112

    User Info Menu

    i have always just wanted to do one thing with the guitar.

    - improvise as much like my bop heroes as possible (or something like that)

    i grew up with the flute - classical flute, but i never had any desire to use it to try to play jazz on

    so the guitar is just what i happened to try to learn how to do that sort of improvising on. i had almost no relationship with the guitar before i started to learn how to play be bop on it.

    every single gig i ever played i got roasted by one or other of my two regular horn players. and that did have quite a lot to do with how easy it was for them to sound fluid and graceful (and easy to hear - for god's sake). its a huge challenge to make guitar really work with a double bass (i.e. no chordal accompaniment) after a strong horn solo.

    i've never done gigs in other styles. though i don't take myself to be trying to recreate a given style either.

    one of my central concerns is how to bring the single-note side of playing and the chordal side together into an effective style. i haven't achieved much with this since my focus has been on blowing. and i don't like solo jazz guitar.

    its important to me that i'm playing good tunes in public - (i don't want my improvising to have to take all the pressure) - and this puts me off very impressionistic sketch-like modern tunes. this restricts the sort of material i take on. but the idea that the mainstream repertoire is any way 'restricted' make no sense to me.

  14. #113

    User Info Menu

    jesus christ i just hear this for the first time

    and now i have heard a guitarist who sounds a lot like bud powell's right hand

    thank you c77

    and pasquale grasso - what a trip



  15. #114

    User Info Menu

    and he has the virtuosity too (which is bonkers - bud powell! i mean that's insane)

    i don't know what to say



  16. #115

    User Info Menu

    You made a prediction, and it was proven to be correct.

  17. #116

    User Info Menu

    well that's absolutely nailed the be-bop jazz guitar thing then

    good

    i thought it might be possible

  18. #117

    User Info Menu

    Do you get what I mean about PG, though? I think his playing owes as much a debt to Frank Gambale etc as it does to Bud Powell. It's shred level e-guitar technique applied to bebop.

    That Just One of Those Things video is completely crazy. I don't think I'd seen that one.
    Last edited by christianm77; 05-31-2016 at 08:32 PM.

  19. #118

    User Info Menu

    the blues in e flat is a revelation

  20. #119

    User Info Menu

    he has that pure be-bop relentless forward falling thing - the continuity of thought is fantastic

    great phrasing too - hard to hear on the insane cole porter - but on the blues its just fantastic

    its really hard to commit to this sort of style because if not done with real flare and fun (ornaments, jokes, quotes, flourishes) you sound relentless and flat.

    joe pass emphasizes the need to play through all the changes - very few guitarists do it - but its meat and drink for horn players (especially alto players i think)

  21. #120

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Do you get what I mean about PG, though? I think his playing owes as much a debt to Frank Gambale etc as it does to Bud Powell. It's shred level e-guitar technique applied to bebop.

    That Just One of Those Things video is completely crazy. I don't think I'd seen that one.
    Interesting observation, Christian. Pasquale learnt from Agostino Di Giorgio who was himself a student of Chuck Wayne. CW developed sweep picking (he called it consecutive-alternate) in an attempt to emulate Charlie Parker's articulation.

  22. #121

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    ……………………………………….
    TBH I'm very conflicted about my direction as a player - I'm very eclectic, as you an see from my videos. I'm uncomfortably aware that this means I will probably never be as good a a) contemporary b) bop or c) swing player as I could be, but I really don't want to specialise. I kind of want to play my thing, but it's hard to know what that is from the inside.

    London sometimes seems like a town of specialists to me, people trying to recreate records. I just want to improvise, listen and play music really, and trying and find my own voice. It's pretty confusing.

    In practice I play a lot swing gigs, but without the interest in either modern gypsy jazz or vintage authenticity which seem like the obvious paths to take with that music. I've fallen into it. So I guess I'll keep trying to be as eclectic as possible while keeping the core of my musicianship as more-or-less changes based jazz and see where that takes me.
    …………………………………………...

    Fuck man! You are a beautiful player and a smart man. You are playing in hip joints with interesting people (as far as the vids allow) and you are stuck in to your craft. To hell with where it all leads. You are making your own way quite convincingly thank you very much. Now have a cup' a tea, some mushy peas, kiss your mum (incorrect spelling) and Bob's your uncle.

  23. #122

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by A. Kingstone View Post
    Fuck man! You are a beautiful player and a smart man. You are playing in hip joints with interesting people (as far as the vids allow) and you are stuck in to your craft. To hell with where it all leads. You are making your own way quite convincingly thank you very much. Now have a cup' a tea, some mushy peas, kiss your mum (incorrect spelling) and Bob's your uncle.
    Hey Alan! That's so kind of you to say. Means a lot.

    I'll stop soul searching and feeling sorry for myself and get on with it then.

    Cheers, mate.

  24. #123

    User Info Menu

    Speaking of Wes and Trane, they performed together at the Monterey jazz festival in 1961 I believe. There's suppose to be an audio of the concert recorded that day that is soon to resurface. From what I've heard, Wes out played everybody on stage that day...including Coletrane!

  25. #124

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JBM View Post
    Speaking of Wes and Trane, they performed together at the Monterey jazz festival in 1961 I believe. There's suppose to be an audio of the concert recorded that day that is soon to resurface.
    I want this to be true, but I've been hearing about this recording for years, and I've never seen even a bootleg of it surface.

    It'd be nice if it finally surfaces, but I'm not expecting it.

  26. #125

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes View Post
    When Bird played "stacked triads" he often made the minor b5 (-the vii) a straight minor, which technically leaves the key, but it is possible to do this without thinking of scales or changing keys at all, just playing a minor for a minor b5 when that triad comes up in the sequence. The sequence for a I chord, starting on I, in C would be: C Em G Bmb5 / Dm F Am C. For the ii in the same key, starting on the root, would be Dm F Am C / Em G Bmb5 Dm. For the V in the same key, C, again starting on the root, would be: G Bmb5 Dm F / Am C E G. If you play those sequences but switch a minor triad for the minor b5 triad, you'll be doing something Bird often did, but you need not think of it in terms of leaving one key or switching scales.
    Mark,
    There's really no such thing as a minor flat five triad. A minor triad with a flatted fifth is a diminished triad.
    Regards,
    Jerome

  27. #126

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by monk View Post
    Mark,
    There's really no such thing as a minor flat five triad. A minor triad with a flatted fifth is a diminished triad.
    Regards,
    Jerome
    That might not be the best way to think of it, though. If we're talking seventh chords, I like to distinguish between a m7b5 (II function) and a half diminished (dominant function), so I could see thinking of a diminished triad as a minorb5 if you're thinking about it in a subdominant function. (But yes, the triads would be the same)
    "I'm opposed to picketing, but I don't know to show it." --Mitch Hedberg

  28. #127

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston Joe View Post
    That might not be the best way to think of it, though. If we're talking seventh chords, I like to distinguish between a m7b5 (II function) and a half diminished (dominant function), so I could see thinking of a diminished triad as a minorb5 if you're thinking about it in a subdominant function. (But yes, the triads would be the same)
    That's quite funny because I'm in the process of amalgamating all iim7b5 chords into (backdoor) dominants in my playing. I don't see the functions as different. (Barry again.) The less chords there are, the easier the soloing, right?

    Bm7b5 = G7

    Bm7b5 E7b9 Am6 = G7 G#o7 Am6

    On the other hand I am on a heavy baroque harmony kick at the moment, and that's another way of looking at it again. No inversion theory, no functions in the modern sense, just intervallic counterpoint on the bass. Heavy!

    In this sense what we call a minor ii-V, is all about the 7 (A) going to #6 (G#) on the B against the static 3rd (D), and then resolving to a 5 3 on A (D-->C, G#-->A, no 5th in this voice leading, unless we expand to 4 voices.)

    All in A minor, using the harmonic alterations for a G#-A resolution. There is only movement within the scale of the key in the baroque understanding... Kind of reminds me of Barry Harris actually...
    Last edited by christianm77; 08-19-2016 at 02:46 PM.

  29. #128

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by monk View Post
    Mark,
    There's really no such thing as a minor flat five triad. A minor triad with a flatted fifth is a diminished triad.
    Regards,
    Jerome
    This is true. But when one is stacking triads extracted from seventh-chords it is easier (for some of us, at least) to think that way. The chord is a minor-seven-flat-five; in this exercise, one is just playing three of its chord tones.
    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  30. #129

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    That's quite funny because I'm in the process of amalgamating all iim7b5 chords into (backdoor) dominants in my playing. I don't see the functions as different. (Barry again.) The less chords there are, the easier the soloing, right?

    Bm7b5 = G7

    Bm7b5 E7b9 Am6 = G7 G#o7 Am6

    On the other hand I am on a heavy baroque harmony kick at the moment, and that's another way of looking at it again. No inversion theory, no functions in the modern sense, just intervallic counterpoint on the bass. Heavy!

    In this sense what we call a minor ii-V, is all about the 7 (A) going to #6 (G#) on the B against the static 3rd (D), and then resolving to a 5 3 on A (D-->C, G#-->A, no 5th in this voice leading, unless we expand to 4 voices.)

    All in A minor, using the harmonic alterations for a G#-A resolution. There is only movement within the scale of the key in the baroque understanding... Kind of reminds me of Barry Harris actually...
    Hi Christian,

    Interesting stuff, by "back door" are you thinking
    Dminor (of some type)
    G7 (no alterations)
    Am6

    I see D minor and Bm7b5 as the same thing in this context.

    The only thing I didn't quite get is even if you think G7 G#dim Am6

    Are you not still having to deal with 3 chords?

    As I'm know you know this but the G#dim is just E7b9 right? I'm not sure where this can help?

  31. #130

    User Info Menu

    Look I done a video! :-)



    I'm not thinking about D minor at all. Backdoor means coming from a tone below in my mind. You can put Dm in there, but that's implicit in my opinion. Every V can be given a ii. They are decoration, not structural.

    You use G7 as Bm7b5 - bascially treating Bm7b5 as a G9 with no bass note.

    That's a G7 with no alterations, G mixolydian/dominant scale and all its associated paraphernalia - the family of four (G7, Bm7b5, Dm7, Fmaj7), bebop scale runs, patterns in thirds, triads and seventh chords with and without chromatic neighbour tones, honeysuckle rose, etc etc, you get the picture.

    (I mean you could use G7#11 too, doesn't matter, but let's keep it simple for now.)

    When you hit up the dominant (E7b9) or - in fact - wherever you fancy, you raise the G to a G# and keep going. The G and G# are completely flexible and up for grabs. But what the G# does is create more gravity pulling you towards the A minor as opposed to the C major. What we would call an interrupted cadence in classical theory, right?

    Take a look at some bop heads and look carefully at what happens over a VI7b9, for instance. Donna Lee is a fantastic example of all of this stuff in operation, I learned a tremendous amount from it.
    Last edited by christianm77; 08-20-2016 at 03:25 PM.

  32. #131

    User Info Menu

    Christian knows his stuff. His contributions here are very valuable.



    Bm7b5 - E7

    Barry would say;

    "Down the G7 Scale (from the 7th) to the third of E7." (For a one bar phrase)

    "Up and down the G7 Scale (to the 7th and down) to the third of E7." (For a two bar phrase)

    Note the G7 and E7 scale are a minor third apart; Sisters & Brothers.

  33. #132

    User Info Menu

    I wrote an exercise on this for a blues (for students.) Here's a link. Check out how the Bo7 and D7b9 chords are handled.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/kcjzrr47x2...Blues.pdf?dl=0

    EDIT: tab needs looking at - just Sibelius default....
    Last edited by christianm77; 08-20-2016 at 08:09 PM.

  34. #133

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I wrote an exercise on this for a blues (for students.) Here's a link. Check out how the Bo7 and D7b9 chords are handled.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/kcjzrr47x2...Blues.pdf?dl=0

    EDIT: tab needs looking at - just Sibelius default....

    That's the real deal.

  35. #134

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Look I done a video! :-)



    I'm not thinking about D minor at all. Backdoor means coming from a tone below in my mind. You can put Dm in there, but that's implicit in my opinion. Every V can be given a ii. They are decoration, not structural.

    You use G7 as Bm7b5 - bascially treating Bm7b5 as a G9 with no bass note.

    That's a G7 with no alterations, G mixolydian/dominant scale and all its associated paraphernalia - the family of four (G7, Bm7b5, Dm7, Fmaj7), bebop scale runs, patterns in thirds, triads and seventh chords with and without chromatic neighbour tones, honeysuckle rose, etc etc, you get the picture.

    (I mean you could use G7#11 too, doesn't matter, but let's keep it simple for now.)

    When you hit up the dominant (E7b9) or - in fact - wherever you fancy, you raise the G to a G# and keep going. The G and G# are completely flexible and up for grabs. But what the G# does is create more gravity pulling you towards the A minor as opposed to the C major. What we would call an interrupted cadence in classical theory, right?

    Take a look at some bop heads and look carefully at what happens over a VI7b9, for instance. Donna Lee is a fantastic example of all of this stuff in operation, I learned a tremendous amount from it.
    Thanks Christian, great stuff lovely playing.

    Yes I watched your video I sort of missed the last 10 seconds which I where I feel you say it all.

    I see where you are coming from now, I'll have to look into the BH method, I did read through a chapter of two of AK book was very well presented, like anything though it will take me some serious shedding to feel free with it.

  36. #135

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post

    When you hit up the dominant (E7b9) or - in fact - wherever you fancy, you raise the G to a G# and keep going. The G and G# are completely flexible and up for grabs. But what the G# does is create more gravity pulling you towards the A minor as opposed to the C major. What we would call an interrupted cadence in classical theory, right?

    Take a look at some bop heads and look carefully at what happens over a VI7b9, for instance. Donna Lee is a fantastic example of all of this stuff in operation, I learned a tremendous amount from it.
    That rising diminished run from the G# you do at 3:40 is something I noticed Bird doing a lot when I started trying to learn some bop lines from the records. It's good to go into the theoretical understanding of why it works, I never really used to think about that much, I was just in a hurry to get the sounds down!

  37. #136

    User Info Menu

    Yes I noticed Bird and other bop players heavily using this scale and of course various diminished runs a few years before I started seriously working on the Barry Harris approach.

    The BH thing can seem a bit awkward at first, but I have learned to appreciate the way it allows you to extend the use of your pre-existing dominant material. In fact, what you learn is not new material itself but the a new way to resolve. It would be the same with the IV7-I and bII7-I cadences, for example.

    In contrast, the way I was looking at it before - mode of V of harmonic minor, required me to learn a while new bunch of material and practice it through a new scale. Instead, you learn to resolve up a tone (a common thing in bop for major keys, too) and get used to moving that one note up a semitone.
    Last edited by christianm77; 08-21-2016 at 05:50 AM.

  38. #137

    User Info Menu

    This is what Barry Harris and Roni Ben-Hur refer to as the "minor's dominant" in their materials(?)

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

  39. #138

    User Info Menu

    Okay I watched that video and having gone through that BH stuff myself ( through Alan and Ronnie's books ) but at a much lower level as a player, I tend to think of Ways to make it much more simple for me.

    The standard ii-V for me becomes ii-7--ii-6. ( ii-6= vii-7b5, note that the V7 and the iiv7b5 have the same basic interchangeable functionality in tonal music .).

    Anytime I see a dominant chord , I can play around it in a few different ways --- (q) either go up a half step and play a minor six, or go down one full step and play a m7b5. Thus instead of, in the key of F, instead of a C7, play a Db-6 ( or even D-69) or a Bbm7b5. These chords are interchangeable , (2) sub the G minor sixth or the E-7b5 for the C7 (3) sub the C° for the C7. (4) straight out tritone sub of the secondary dominant, or Gb7.

    Even this is a shit load of stuff for me to really think about and internalize. I am nowhere near finished internalizing it.
    Navdeep Singh.

  40. #139

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by David B View Post
    This is what Barry Harris and Roni Ben-Hur refer to as the "minor's dominant" in their materials(?)
    I think so IIRC.

  41. #140

    User Info Menu

    So I have a question of how to practice the basic premise of Barry Harris's method: dominance to consonance. The expression of the fundamental 5-1 cadence.

    Let's say we limit ourselves to, for example the key of F. And let's further add the following limitations: working with a particular region of the fretboard and A particular string set. Let's for example limit ourselves to drop 2, F major, first four strings. Let's limit ourselves further by concentrating the tonic chord into the voice dispersion of 1563 ( basically third position ) and 3615 ( sixth position )

    I can immediately think of six separate grips to express the dominant V dissonance ( various degrees ) against this F6 chord ---

    C7


    Db-6
    G-6
    Gb7

    All of these grips are readily available and interchangeable in the given positions we have defined, and often, changing one for the other will only change a note or have a minor change on the voicing.

    How would you imagine practicing the six chords together, either as block chords, as block chords that can be arpeggiated, or as lines ?
    Navdeep Singh.

  42. #141

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NSJ View Post
    So I have a question of how to practice the basic premise of Barry Harris's method: dominance to consonance. The expression of the fundamental 5-1 cadence.

    Let's say we limit ourselves to, for example the key of F. And let's further add the following limitations: working with a particular region of the fretboard and A particular string set. Let's for example limit ourselves to drop 2, F major, first four strings. Let's limit ourselves further by concentrating the tonic chord into the voice dispersion of 1563 ( basically third position ) and 3615 ( sixth position )

    I can immediately think of six separate grips to express the dominant V dissonance ( various degrees ) against this F6 chord ---

    C7


    Db-6
    G-6
    Gb7

    All of these grips are readily available and interchangeable in the given positions we have defined, and often, changing one for the other will only change a note or have a minor change on the voicing.

    How would you imagine practicing the six chords together, either as block chords, as block chords that can be arpeggiated, or as lines ?
    The BH improvisation approach is ultimately scale based. Without giving a very long answer I will say just taking the family of four (seventh chords on 1 3 5 b7 of each dominant) alone for each of the three main dominant scales (V7, bVII7, bII7) you have 12 possibilities right off the bat, 16 if you add in the minor's dominant for the bVII7.

    Thats just for starters.

    BUT - that's not the point. We are playing melodies that move in thirds, triads, chords or steps through the scale and threading them through the changes. The harmony is to some extent emergent from that. You practice melodies and language.
    Last edited by christianm77; 08-22-2016 at 08:08 PM.

  43. #142

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    The BH improvisation approach is ultimately scale based. Without giving a very long answer I will say just taking the family of four (seventh chords on 1 3 5 b7 of each dominant) alone for each of the three main dominant scales (V7, bVII7, bII7) you have 12 possibilities right off the bat, 16 if you add in the minor's dominant for the bVII7.

    Thats just for starters.

    BUT - that's not the point. We are playing melodies that move in thirds, triads, chords or steps through the scale and threading them through the changes. The harmony is to some extent emergent from that. You practice melodies and language.
    I think my brain just melted from all the possibilities. The end they say is listless .

    I think I will try, as an experimentstion, basically what Pasquale demonstrated in his master class videos, but use all the various groups and chord changes and substitutions, not just the M-m6 chords against the diminished ( I.e., the harmonized chord scales) -----> completely master all the grips to make them completely interchangeable at whim without thinking and to reduce and simplify the issue to a a basic right-hand problem and work on right hand development and practice all sorts of arpeggio patterns against all of the interchangeable grips and ( envelope, please ) ...................................see what they sound like.

    Pasquale hybrid picks Chuck Wayne style, I'll just have to do the PIMA .

    By the way, Pasqualle just released a third master class. At the same time that the associated website was hacked and destroyed. Apparently it's being rebuilt.
    Navdeep Singh.

  44. #143

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NSJ View Post
    I think my brain just melted from all the possibilities. The end they say is listless .

    I think I will try, as an experimentstion, basically what Pasquale demonstrated in his master class videos, but use all the various groups and chord changes and substitutions, not just the M-m6 chords against the diminished ( I.e., the harmonized chord scales) -----> completely master all the grips to make them completely interchangeable at whim without thinking and to reduce and simplify the issue to a a basic right-hand problem and work on right hand development and practice all sorts of arpeggio patterns against all of the interchangeable grips and ( envelope, please ) ...................................see what they sound like.

    Pasquale hybrid picks Chuck Wayne style, I'll just have to do the PIMA .

    By the way, Pasqualle just released a third master class. At the same time that the associated website was hacked and destroyed. Apparently it's being rebuilt.
    I must have got lucky as I managed to download the other two

  45. #144

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I must have got lucky as I managed to download the other two
    Yes, I have them already. I watched them many times.

    It's one big cluster fuck what can be done with Domimant 7th harmony , absolutely dizzing.

    I need a roadmap. Especially when you add this to the four different ways of playing with the dominant as put forth by John Stowell---take any dominant 7th chord (135b7) EG, (C7) and play either a melodic minor (12b34567) or harmonic minor scale or arpeggio that is:

    A whole tone below (Bb melodic minor)
    A half step above (C# MM)
    A perfect forth above (F MM)
    A perfect fifth above (G MM)

    All this information is useless unless it is fully internalized
    It's impossible to half ass and dabble in it, you got to get into the muck of it all and remain in the swamp for a good long time
    Navdeep Singh.

  46. #145

    User Info Menu

    Still following that conversation... well done you two Christian that video sounded great. NSJ you're probably a lot further ahead than I am, but if I may venture a suggestion, why not work out some some limitations. Maybe according to context, letting the melodic and harmonic "world" a particular tune lives in narrow down the possibilities and taking it from there, so that different tunes illustrate different possibilities. Or maybe I'm talking out of my *** and you've already thought about this.

  47. #146

    User Info Menu

    The best way I have found to get my head round the Barry Harris chord possibilities is to play around with it on one tune at a time. Usually something fairly simple e.g. I've been doing Blue Bossa the last few days.

  48. #147

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NSJ View Post
    Yes, I have them already. I watched them many times.

    It's one big cluster fuck what can be done with Domimant 7th harmony , absolutely dizzing.

    I need a roadmap. Especially when you add this to the four different ways of playing with the dominant as put forth by John Stowell---take any dominant 7th chord (135b7) EG, (C7) and play either a melodic minor (12b34567) or harmonic minor scale or arpeggio that is:

    A whole tone below (Bb melodic minor)
    A half step above (C# MM)
    A perfect forth above (F MM)
    A perfect fifth above (G MM)

    All this information is useless unless it is fully internalized
    It's impossible to half ass and dabble in it, you got to get into the muck of it all and remain in the swamp for a good long time
    Generally I've kind of tried to get one thing in my playing at a time. It takes so long to learn anything it's what I have to do. I spent a couple of months on b7 pivot arpeggios on dominants (and now it's just about everywhere in my playing.)
    Last edited by christianm77; 08-23-2016 at 10:41 AM.

  49. #148

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Generally I've kind of tried to get one thing in my playing at a time. It takes so long to learn anything it's what I have to do. I spent a couple of months on b7 sub pivots (and now it's just about everywhere in my playing.)

    I guess as someone who has only been playing for a few years, I still have to focus on everything and get as much in.

    But it's true, obviously, it takes a long time to internalize any essential concept . I practiced a shit load, months on end, of playing intervals and dyads, and now I feel like I can play thirds, sixths, tenths, thirteens and tritones, somewhat naturally, without thinking consciously. I practiced a shit load of the drop two and drop three Barry Harris harmonized diminished scale. It's only starting to feel natural Now, but only just .

    to widen the pallet in any significant and meaningful way that sort of becomes ingrained and a part of one's playing takes a long long long time. At least for me .

    The collateral fact is that I understand and can navigate around the fingerboard easier, which will make other tasks less difficult . Sometimes, half the job is really becoming familiar with the workspace .
    Navdeep Singh.

  50. #149

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NSJ View Post
    I guess as someone who has only been playing for a few years, I still have to focus on everything and get as much in.

    But it's true, obviously, it takes a long time to internalize any essential concept . I practiced a shit load, months on end, of playing intervals and dyads, and now I feel like I can play thirds, sixths, tenths, thirteens and tritones, somewhat naturally, without thinking consciously. I practiced a shit load of the drop two and drop three Barry Harris harmonized diminished scale. It's only starting to feel natural Now, but only just .

    to widen the pallet in any significant and meaningful way that sort of becomes ingrained and a part of one's playing takes a long long long time. At least for me .

    The collateral fact is that I understand and can navigate around the fingerboard easier, which will make other tasks less difficult . Sometimes, half the job is really becoming familiar with the workspace .
    IMO it's better to learn one thing excellently than try to learn everything. I would advise my students to focus on one thing. I've got on fella working on m6 arpeggios in every position and around the cycle of fourths. Another guy is just focussing on the b7 sub (he's a more modern cat), another guy is working on triads through a blues and so on....

    If you can decide what to practice and focus on it that is half the battle. I have this problem myself. That's why having a teacher is helpful....

  51. #150

    User Info Menu

    http://www.jazzguitarlife.com/Wes%20...Techniques.pdf

    Thought some may find this interesting.