-
Originally Posted by Stevebol
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.
-
03-17-2016 04:44 AM
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
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.
-
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.
-
Originally Posted by sunnysideup
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.
-
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 ;-)
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
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:
-
@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.
-
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?) :-)
-
@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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Originally Posted by PMB
-
"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.)
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
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.
-
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.
-
Originally Posted by rintincop
-
Originally Posted by Stevebol
-
Myth? What myth? Am I perpetuating it? I'm confused.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
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.
-
Originally Posted by Stevebol
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.
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
-
Originally Posted by PMB
-
Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar
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.
-
Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar
I presume the latter actually as you specify maj7...Last edited by christianm77; 03-19-2016 at 09:44 AM.
-
Originally Posted by dortmundjazzguitar
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.
Vintage fuzz on "space" transistors
Today, 08:33 AM in For Sale