Embraceable You - second chord in progression

[pamosmusic]

No, I got that part. I just read it as you sort of down playing the differences in the outcomes of different approaches.

Oh okay, well I can’t really help you there.

[Tal_175]

Oh okay, well I can’t really help you there.

No need.

[Bobby Timmons]

Ah well not all of us have flawless command of the diminished scale, I suppose.

I slacked on the diminished scale for a while but eventually told myself breh there are only 3 of them.

[charlieparker]

That brings up an interesting question. Learn some dominant language and find ways to apply them in every situation tunes throw at you is hopefully more than just being too lazy to practice diminished and harmonic minor language. Barry Harris did teach building language using harmonic minor and diminished scales afterall, so he wasn't about just using the dominant scale.

There is also a minor counterpart to this approach. Presumably minorization was an artistic choice for Pat Martino, Wes Montgomery and Emily Remler, not just a short cut. Or was it? I think whether you are a dominator, minorator or multivator should be informed by how you want to sound, not because learning language using new harmonic sonarities isn't a fun activity in itself.

Jazz isn't composing. You have to perform in real time. That invariably leads to choices. Maybe for the greatest players this isn't a concern, but for many (most?) there are probably trade offs between exploring one approach deeply versus exploring many different approaches.

It seems like many of the greats have picked a lane like you mentioned, whether that was an intentional artistic choice or not is a bit of an academic question.

If you like the sounds of Barry Harris explore his concepts, if you want to sound like Wes delve into his playing.

[ragman1]

Jazz isn't composing. You have to perform in real time. That invariably leads to choices.

You know, this thread is about the second chord of Embraceable You which happens to be a bIII dim. Probably, if one is soloing over the tune, which is not fast, it would take about a single second to play it. And here we are eleven pages later.

No one wants to play tunes, they prefer academic waffle that has no end. And repeat, repeat, repeat.

Play a tune, solve the problem. You don't need a PhD.

[pamosmusic]

I mean. I play tunes and still find this stuff interesting.

[ragman1]

Oh, so do I, but as an exercise in getting round a tune it's nothing, stick one note in, arp the dim chord, whatever. The rest of the tune is probably a lot more troublesome to play. In fact, it definitely is.

And Body And Soul is nearly impossible. You need a medal for tackling that one.

[pamosmusic]

And Body And Soul is nearly impossible. You need a medal for tackling that one.

Not sure why that would be

[grahambop]

And Body And Soul is nearly impossible. You need a medal for tackling that one.

Huh? I think it’s relatively straightforward, to be honest. Mostly diatonic moves in Db (A section) then in D (B section). Mostly using chunks of stuff you can find in other tunes.

[pamosmusic]

Huh? I think it’s relatively straightforward, to be honest. Mostly diatonic moves in Db (A section) then in D (B section). Mostly using chunks of stuff you can find in other tunes.

I played the melody on it a lot. And on the biii dim in that one I played the melody every time.

whoops.

But yeah I think Embraceable You is a little trickier.

[rpjazzguitar]

When I read threads about multiple theoretical considerations I often wonder how players employ these concepts in their daily practice and when performing.

My experience is that it's very difficult to get a single new concept into my playing. And, for those too-rare moments when I do play something new in performance, I rarely know where it came from. In addition, when my mind suddenly focuses on applying a theoretical concept - that's the moment the solo gets worse.

So, I'm trying to hijack the thread to a limited extent.

Might people post how they get from the theoretical concept, to finding the sound, memorizing the sound, figuring out how it fits into tunes, etc etc etc?

[Bobby Timmons]

^ Work it as an exercise, work it in more natural context, work it in a tune. Do this repeatedly until it's in your playing. It takes many attempts and failures, doesn't happen immediately.

[grahambop]

I agree with Bobby. I’ve been messing about with pentatonic patterns and triad pair stuff for quite a while, but it’s only gradually creeping into my playing. Takes a frustratingly long time.

I guess practising it on tunes is the best way. Or just on small progressions e.g. ii-Vs, or on a few chords at a time (taken from a tune). It needs to get absorbed to the point where you don’t have to really think about it when playing.

[Tal_175]

I agree with Bobby. I’ve been messing about with pentatonic patterns and triad pair stuff for quite a while, but it’s only gradually creeping into my playing. Takes a frustratingly long time.

I guess practising it on tunes is the best way. Or just on small progressions e.g. ii-Vs, or on a few chords at a time (taken from a tune). It needs to get absorbed to the point where you don’t have to really think about it when playing.

I find it easier to work with a lick (or small number of licks) that uses the concept. The lick becomes a reference for the concept. Then I expand out and make variations of the lick based on the concept. It is very crucial that I like the lick, that it's not just any lick that uses the concept.

I remember Emily Remler saying that people complimented her that she sounded like Wes Montgomery but all she did was to deeply internalize a handful of Wes licks that she liked and make variations of these licks. She never even learned a full chorus of a Wes solo.

[pamosmusic]

I find it easier to work with a lick (or small number of licks) that uses the concept. The lick becomes a reference for the concept. Then I expand out and make variations of the lick based on the concept. It is very crucial that I like the lick, that it's not just any lick that uses the concept.

I remember Emily Remler saying that people complimented her that she sounded like Wes Montgomery but all she did was to deeply internalize a handful of Wes licks that she liked and make variations of these licks. She never even learned a full chorus of a Wes solo.

I like that.

To rp…

I think a big part is compartmentalizating performance from practice. That took a really long time, but when I’m feeling good, don’t really think much while I’m playing. When I’m feeling a little less good, I think but it’s almost all about rhythm and about the drummer if there is one.

So the practice part — it’s just digging in and trying to make it sort of immersive. So for an example, I was pulling these sort of quadrad ideas out of these Jim hall solos, so I worked on the solos trying to get them up to tempo for my technique stuff; I worked the patterns diatonically with accent patterns and some ornaments for my scale stuff; I improvised with them using a bunch of different constraints when I was working on tunes; and I tried building lines with them using some of the ideas I liked.

So I just try and make it as immersive as possible, which I think helps weed out ideas that don’t feel worth that time, and also just acknowledges how long it takes for stuff to come into my playing. Even then it’s still months down the road, usually after I’ve stopped working on it.

[rpjazzguitar]

I appreciate the thoughtful responses.

It sounds like most work on one thing (lick, sound, concept -- I'm not sure how I should define "thing") at a time.

For example, say you find a cool way to play through a ii V. Get it down either as a specific lick or maybe as a framework on which to hang some embellishments. Get it under your fingers and then find ways to fit it into different tunes. Don't expect instant results.

So, when there's a post that delineates a bunch of combinatorics, encompassing, possibly, dozens of sounds, you're still working on one element at a time?

This sort of thing has come up. My favorite example, not on this forum, was a suggestion to work through every possible triad (maj, min, aug, dim, 12 keys) paired with every other possible triad, to form triad pairs and then play all of them against every possible bass note. What's that? ((12x4)**2)(12)? How do you distill that down to a manageable practice regimen? Rhetorical question. I'm aware that some players are able to utilize theory.

[Bobby Timmons]

I find it easier to work with a lick (or small number of licks) that uses the concept. The lick becomes a reference for the concept. Then I expand out and make variations of the lick based on the concept. It is very crucial that I like the lick, that it's not just any lick that uses the concept.

I remember Emily Remler saying that people complimented her that she sounded like Wes Montgomery but all she did was to deeply internalize a handful of Wes licks that she liked and make variations of these licks. She never even learned a full chorus of a Wes solo.

Good piece of advice there. I've noticed that trying to apply the concept in a musical bit helps integrate it.

[grahambop]

This sort of thing has come up. My favorite example, not on this forum, was a suggestion to work through every possible triad (maj, min, aug, dim, 12 keys) paired with every other possible triad, to form triad pairs and then play all of them against every possible bass note. What's that? ((12x4)**2)(12)? How do you distill that down to a manageable practice regimen? Rhetorical question. I'm aware that some players are able to utilize theory.

That’s daft for normal people (i.e. with jobs, families etc.). Better to pick one combination first and work on it. E.g. major triads a whole step apart are massively useful. Just getting those down would add something you can use in your playing.

Also helps to get some direction, e.g. I got a Jerry Bergonzi video where he details which triad pairs are most useful, which chords they fit etc. I wouldn’t waste time on all the ‘theoretically possible’ ones.

[Christian Miller]

Yeah there’s a few triad combos that I find coming up again and again. Jordan’s stuff is good.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pamosmusic]

This sort of thing has come up. My favorite example, not on this forum, was a suggestion to work through every possible triad (maj, min, aug, dim, 12 keys) paired with every other possible triad, to form triad pairs and then play all of them against every possible bass note. What's that? ((12x4)**2)(12)? How do you distill that down to a manageable practice regimen? Rhetorical question. I'm aware that some players are able to utilize theory.

Fairly certain this is from Advancing Guitarist, no?

[GuyBoden]

I find it easier to work with a lick (or small number of licks) that uses the concept. The lick becomes a reference for the concept. Then I expand out and make variations of the lick based on the concept. It is very crucial that I like the lick, that it's not just any lick that uses the concept.

Yes, I agree, I prefer to use licks to learn a new concept too.

For practice, I apply the concept by varying the lick, so it can be used throughout a song.

I think this is very, very, very good advice by @TAL_175.

[Reg]

Yea... there can be more than one analysis of the chord pattern. And sometimes it just depends on how one wants to play the tune...

Fill in the rest of the notes or how you might want to expand the passage. Different References can create different results when expanding relationships. Passing or Approach.

personally... it's more fun to make tune blusey.

Try just comping for the tune.... not just the basic changes, how you might actually play the tune. What notes are you using to help embellish the chords with, what other chords are you adding. What Chord Patterns are you using.

My point is... what functional movement are you creating. This will help you understand how you might want to perform the tune.

Generally I always hear the Bbdom7 as more of a Dom. function of the A-7. The A-7 is the target of the Bbdim7 chord. But that's just because I like bluesin out old standards. And the last "A" section kind spells out where or what Gershwin was going.

I don't think there is a wrong analysis or approach for playing tune... just try and keep it musically organizes... or on the same boat.

[pamosmusic]

And the last "A" section kind spells out where or what Gershwin was going.

Not sure what you mean here. Just the general plagal IV-I vibe going on throughout?

Not sure if that’s what you mean but that would be an interesting thought. He does live in that subdominant land a lot in the tune … that first cadence that goes back to Am instead of resolving, then resolves by way of Cm, etc.

[Mick-7]

I got a Jerry Bergonzi video where he details which triad pairs are most useful, which chords they fit etc. I wouldn’t waste time on all the ‘theoretically possible’ ones.

What video is that?

[grahambop]

What video is that?

Jerry Bergonzi - improvising with triad pairs (MyMusicMasterclass).