The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 10 of 40 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Posts 226 to 250 of 998
  1. #226

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    The older I get, the more I think that the essence of jazz is to get your playing to where you can address every chord in a tune with your solo....and then, don't EVER do that.
    I actually think a scandalously large amount of it is faking it with tremendous style.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #227

    User Info Menu

    I like some players who play a lot of notes, although mostly I prefer players who don't.

    Of the players who play a lot of notes, it's my impression that they have a kind of mental lick dictionary. That is, they know a great many licks and can apply them in clever ways, even at high speed.

    I once learned a really interesting long line from a recorded solo. Later, I met the player and played the lick. He said, "oh! my old licks!". That is, he recognized it, he had it categorized in his mind as a "lick" and he didn't use it any more. Notably, I can't think of another tune in which he used that lick in a recognizable way. I think I heard pieces of it. I have heard him, live, playing long lines that I recognized -- meaning they were worked out in advance. This player is, btw, a Berklee grad and I suspect knows CST quite thoroughly.

    I heard a story about one of the Brecker brothers. He'd develop a lick and write it out. Then he would shed it for a year, at the end of which he'd bring it into a public performance and be burning.

    Now, I don't feel that way about Jim Hall's ballad playing. Maybe that's because it's easier to compose new melody at a slower tempo. Or maybe he was capable of making it so seamless you'd never guess it was pre-practiced.

    The point I'm thinking about is that the players I like seem to be thinking melody, whether prepared or not, and are not doing things like recycling short phrases in different ways against moving harmony per theoretical considerations, although that can be great too.

  4. #228

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    I like some players who play a lot of notes, although mostly I prefer players who don't.

    Of the players who play a lot of notes, it's my impression that they have a kind of mental lick dictionary. That is, they know a great many licks and can apply them in clever ways, even at high speed.

    I once learned a really interesting long line from a recorded solo. Later, I met the player and played the lick. He said, "oh! my old licks!". That is, he recognized it, he had it categorized in his mind as a "lick" and he didn't use it any more. Notably, I can't think of another tune in which he used that lick in a recognizable way. I think I heard pieces of it. I have heard him, live, playing long lines that I recognized -- meaning they were worked out in advance. This player is, btw, a Berklee grad and I suspect knows CST quite thoroughly.

    I heard a story about one of the Brecker brothers. He'd develop a lick and write it out. Then he would shed it for a year, at the end of which he'd bring it into a public performance and be burning.

    Now, I don't feel that way about Jim Hall's ballad playing. Maybe that's because it's easier to compose new melody at a slower tempo. Or maybe he was capable of making it so seamless you'd never guess it was pre-practiced.

    The point I'm thinking about is that the players I like seem to be thinking melody, whether prepared or not, and are not doing things like recycling short phrases in different ways against moving harmony per theoretical considerations, although that can be great too.
    I was just working through a Jim solo today funnily enough, Without a Song from the Bridge. It's really one of the clearest solos I've worked on for ages. It's so easy to hear, like the melody of a standard. And, properly improvised. That to me is near miraculous.

    Thing is, looking at my local scene I don't know that many true improvisers. Not in the sense that Jim was, or Sonny. It's a harsh thing top say, but I include myself in that category. Trying to improvise more, though.

  5. #229

    User Info Menu

    I would like to know if Lage improvised or composed the first chorus.



    It's a perfect first chorus...

  6. #230

    User Info Menu

    I recently made a chart for Bossa Antigua, a Paul Desmond composition. Jim Hall played on the original track.

    It was difficult at first, because I couldn't tell where the head ended. Odd to say that.

    The head has a beautiful melody. It seems to go on and on. In fact, apparently, it returns to the top and then he plays an equally beautiful melody that seems to be a development of the first chorus' melody.

    I'm not sure if his own chart would have had that second chorus' melody written out or not. Did the changes have two different melodies? Or was the second one an improvised solo?

    It's on youtube and worth a listen.

  7. #231

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    I recently made a chart for Bossa Antigua, a Paul Desmond composition. Jim Hall played on the original track.

    It was difficult at first, because I couldn't tell where the head ended. Odd to say that.

    The head has a beautiful melody. It seems to go on and on. In fact, apparently, it returns to the top and then he plays an equally beautiful melody that seems to be a development of the first chorus' melody.

    I'm not sure if his own chart would have had that second chorus' melody written out or not. Did the changes have two different melodies? Or was the second one an improvised solo?

    It's on youtube and worth a listen.
    I need to learn that rep.... I know a sax player who plays a lot of that stuff....

  8. #232

    User Info Menu

    Love that tune...totally agree.

    As for "faking it." If you can hear what's tension and what's resolution in a tune...well...could that just be it? Maybe...

  9. #233

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    I recently made a chart for Bossa Antigua, a Paul Desmond composition. Jim Hall played on the original track.

    It was difficult at first, because I couldn't tell where the head ended. Odd to say that.

    The head has a beautiful melody. It seems to go on and on. In fact, apparently, it returns to the top and then he plays an equally beautiful melody that seems to be a development of the first chorus' melody.

    I'm not sure if his own chart would have had that second chorus' melody written out or not. Did the changes have two different melodies? Or was the second one an improvised solo?

    It's on youtube and worth a listen.
    Desmond is definitely a very special player... I haven't listened to that youtube but the head is in the Real Book vol3...

  10. #234

    User Info Menu

    I have 1 (one) CD of Parker's music, someone gave it to me, unlabeled, lots of out takes and alternate takes, you can hear exactly the same licks, for bars and bars, even full solos going on over different tunes, obviously trying out which tune prefab licks would fit the best. I find it funny that experts in Jazz and Parker, like fellow forum members are, can even debate on the issue. It's just too obvious. It does not take away from the music being played, though. It's still good. Bit old fashioned, but good. That disc is in the car. My kid prefers it over Miles finds it cheerful. Miles (Steamin, Cookin ... 4 CDs), she thinks is too heavy, always asks me to turn it off and put some FM radio on. Coltrane (Giant Steps) she does not comment, just waits for me to get concentrated on traffic and switch to FM herself. Rollins ( I don"t know really what it is), I turn off.

  11. #235

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by guido5
    Desmond is definitely a very special player... I haven't listened to that youtube but the head is in the Real Book vol3...

    Which book? I have something called the Real Book Vol 3 and another called The New Real Book, but Bossa Antigua isn't in either one, which is why I made my own chart.

    Another interesting thing about Bossa Antigua is the drum part. It sounds like sidestick only sort of part. Brazilians hear it as American, which is understandable. Jim's comping locks in perfectly -- and I have found it tricky to nail it the way he did.

  12. #236

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Which book? I have something called the Real Book Vol 3 and another called The New Real Book, but Bossa Antigua isn't in either one, which is why I made my own chart.

    Another interesting thing about Bossa Antigua is the drum part. It sounds like sidestick only sort of part. Brazilians hear it as American, which is understandable. Jim's comping locks in perfectly -- and I have found it tricky to nail it the way he did.
    This one has it:
    3: The Real Book - Volume III: C Instruments, 2nd Edition: Hal Leonard Corp.: 0073999883022: Amazon.com: Books

  13. #237

    User Info Menu


    Thanks. I don't have that one, although I have one with a similar title.

  14. #238

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Thanks. I don't have that one, although I have one with a similar title.
    These are the Hal Leonard legal books, royalties paid to composers etc. They are up to Vol VI. Missing the delightful funk of the old black market ones, but a lot of great, interesting, questionable and outright weird song choices... I wish they would re-issue them in real alphabetic order... oh well...

  15. #239

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Which book? I have something called the Real Book Vol 3 and another called The New Real Book, but Bossa Antigua isn't in either one, which is why I made my own chart.

    Another interesting thing about Bossa Antigua is the drum part. It sounds like sidestick only sort of part. Brazilians hear it as American, which is understandable. Jim's comping locks in perfectly -- and I have found it tricky to nail it the way he did.
    And that riff!


  16. #240

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    I have 1 (one) CD of Parker's music, someone gave it to me, unlabeled, lots of out takes and alternate takes, you can hear exactly the same licks, for bars and bars, even full solos going on over different tunes, obviously trying out which tune prefab licks would fit the best. I find it funny that experts in Jazz and Parker, like fellow forum members are, can even debate on the issue. It's just too obvious. It does not take away from the music being played, though. It's still good. Bit old fashioned, but good. That disc is in the car. My kid prefers it over Miles finds it cheerful. Miles (Steamin, Cookin ... 4 CDs), she thinks is too heavy, always asks me to turn it off and put some FM radio on. Coltrane (Giant Steps) she does not comment, just waits for me to get concentrated on traffic and switch to FM herself. Rollins ( I don"t know really what it is), I turn off.
    Bebop is all licks. Just like Blues, more complex lines of course, but licks nevertheless. Easier and more natural to play on sax I think.

    If you want cheerful, try Dizzy. Such a good fun vibes, I always preferred him to Parker.

  17. #241

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
    If you want cheerful, try Dizzy. Such a good fun vibes, I always preferred him to Parker.
    I like Dizzy. His appearance in Muppet Show was one of my music "education" milestones. Nobody to get me wrong, I like Parker, too.

  18. #242

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    If you see any false information in what I have posted, please bring it to my attention. I do not believe I am misrepresenting anything, but I am always interested in correcting mistakes where they occur.
    (Humour intended)

  19. #243

    User Info Menu

    Yea... you do need some skills to play jazz.... at least at a level where what your playing isn't just a rehearsed performance. Nothing wrong with rehearsed performance etc... But generally... not what many would call Jazz.

    Even if you disagree ... your still going to need some skills.

    The technical part... is just the mechanical aspects. You can work those out anyway you choose..... BUT RESULTS ARE DIFFERENT. Most accomplished musicians can tell within a few seconds what another musicians skill level is or isn't. Which again isn't bad or wrong... but at gigs... you know what and where the music is going... or more importantly... where it isn't going.

    So technical proficiency on your instrument is REAL... it needs to be addressed, worked out and developed.

    The theory, explanations, feel, melodic, harmonic etc...... how ever one wants to verbally label how you perform what your playing also has very mechanical aspects. You can also work this out anyway you choose... but again the results are different.

    CST... is just one of many approaches to having a mechanically organized reference for developing your ears and voice. It's not the only approach, but it's well organized and you would be foolish to not to become aware of the approach.

    CST is just being aware of complete note collections... for every note attack... Like soloing with complete chords, 13th chords. And being aware of the possible organizations of choosing those complete chords.

    Sure generally you don't need and would not actually play that way... and vanilla is great, but why wouldn't one want to have more choices.

    Take basic Cmin pentatonic pattern.... C Eb F G Bb C... it's great, and you have 5 versions to work with etc... now replace the b7 with maj.6th........................................... ..C Eb F G A C.... you now have 5 new versions... and the patterns physically, mechanically open the possibilities for many more chord progressions, Blue note usage and access to melodic minor.

    If you want to play jazz... you need to work on more than just learning tunes.... you need to learn how to play tunes.

  20. #244

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    The older I get, the more I think that the essence of jazz is to get your playing to where you can address every chord in a tune with your solo....and then, don't EVER do that.
    This is a major understanding that most don't get... It's becoming aware of possible harmonic organization... which leads to teaching your ears to feel or understand the organization of relationships between notes... which leads to developing great melody like lines.

    Listen to live performances... sometimes it take a few choruses to get the organization right, or to he point that it sounds and feels right. There are reasons why something sound melodic... like a balanced melody, a great solo etc...

  21. #245

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Yea... you do need some skills to play jazz.... at least at a level where what your playing isn't just a rehearsed performance. Nothing wrong with rehearsed performance etc... But generally... not what many would call Jazz.

    Even if you disagree ... your still going to need some skills.
    Nonsense, I think it's possible to play world class guitar with no skills at all. Just look at Nick Jonas. ;-)

    CST... is just one of many approaches to having a mechanically organized reference for developing your ears and voice. It's not the only approach, but it's well organized and you would be foolish to not to become aware of the approach.
    I actually think it's really hard in today's jazz education environment not to become aware of the approach to some extent.

    When I bang on about CST, it's - of course - from a personal misgiving with the approach and how I feel it confused and intimidated me. Now this is not the fault of the approach - more how it was communicated to me, but I wonder if others haven't encountered similar confusions. If I'd gone to Berklee, sure. But I hadn't the funds, the ability nor the inclination to go when I was 19. I'm not the only one.

    20 years on I am now as of 2018, teaching Jazz Guitar at undergraduate level. Hmmm. Well, I HAVE to know CST and use that language whether I like it or not.

    Secondly, a lot of CST style factoids (which do not necessarily originate, from for instance, the Berklee syllabus) are in circulation and are confusing.

    Usually when the original sources are read carefully there turns out to be more nuance. For instance Levine talks about Bud Powell using the harmonic minor scale, late in the Jazz Theory book, but almost as an aside, while it was literally the first thing I noticed players doing on 7b9 chords when I started digging properly into bebop... (My adoption of the BH way of constructing language followed on a lot later when I realised it just fitted perfectly with that music.)

    That's an issue of emphasis. If Levine was writing a text about bebop common practice it might have been featured more prominently. I can't say he doesn't know his stuff.

    I've made my peace with CST as a system if only because I've always known about it theoretically, it's just actually using it in my music has been an on-off affair. I'm glad I spent a while really bedding in the basics and learning a bit about bop, so now it just gives me options, and is no longer seems dictatorial or prescribed. Again this is really a matter of emphasis in teaching.

    I also think CST functions best - and again this might seem flipping obvious to people, but that's not the case for everyone - in combination with a knowledge of diatonic harmony. For instance, I always like to give the example of something like Stella, or a Jobim tune, where you have very often a simple mostly diatonic melody that is harmonised in a very rich way, and that these diatonic melody notes what CST would call tensions in the chords.

    I can't see how one could be a jazz musician without understanding the diatonic side of it. I think again this is something which is really obvious on piano. The same can be said of CST actually, and bebop lines. On guitar, it's confusing.

    Which is why you emphasise the importance of learning the fretboard. Most modern players aim to to 'keyboardise' the fretboard. OTOH - there's some great guitar style things that can be lost going too far down this route. I also feel many of the players I admire have/had a really guitaristic way of going about things.

    So as always, I'm going to check out the music. Bill Evans is currently schooling me on all that Russian 1/2-whole stuff he likes to play :-)

    CST is just being aware of complete note collections... for every note attack... Like soloing with complete chords, 13th chords. And being aware of the possible organizations of choosing those complete chords.
    I've never understood why 7 notes though, not 6 or 8. Perhaps that's why all the modern cats like to play in 7/8 haha.

    Sure generally you don't need and would not actually play that way... and vanilla is great, but why wouldn't one want to have more choices.

    Take basic Cmin pentatonic pattern.... C Eb F G Bb C... it's great, and you have 5 versions to work with etc... now replace the b7 with maj.6th........................................... ..C Eb F G A C.... you now have 5 new versions... and the patterns physically, mechanically open the possibilities for many more chord progressions, Blue note usage and access to melodic minor.
    Yes that's a really cool way in... Essentially you can relate minor pentatonic to the m7, and min pent 6 to the m6... This could form the basis of a whole approach to teaching that can kick off with Charlie Christian and take you right through melodic minor modes etc in a simple and guitaristic way. I'd almost consider writing a book using that approach if one doesn't already exist.

    If you want to play jazz... you need to work on more than just learning tunes.... you need to learn how to play tunes.
    I kind of come to the same point again... Most of the players I admire seem to have a way of working consistently with material though a tune. I think that's the thing to learn, really....

  22. #246

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    The older I get, the more I think that the essence of jazz is to get your playing to where you can address every chord in a tune with your solo....and then, don't EVER do that.

    +1

    Trying to figure out how to put this, practice and playing needs to be the inverse of each other. Practice breaking things into small pieces, then study and practice over the bits. When working on playing or when actually playing think of the big picture. In more practical words practice your II-V's, short, long, cycles, from tunes. But when practicing/playing a tune now hear/feel those long phrases, start hearing/feeling rhythmically and using those little II-V's becoming the melodic resource for the long phrases. Another way to look at it is how you think do with the guitar and without the guitar in your hand. You practice your II-V's, but when you set your guitar down listen to the backing track or CD without the guitar you start hearing the long lines and phrases. We want to get to where our playing with the guitar in our hands is the same.


    I started down this path when on tech practice. Learn the fretboard wasn't coming together like I hoped. Then I stopped focusing on big fingering systems and positions (but I had done that work first). Then I started focusing on smaller pieces one octave or less for scales, arp's, everything. Then the whole fretboard came together instead of me trying to adjust to fit a big fingering system, I had the small pieces to make any type of path around the neck I needed. Again practice small to play big. I'm trying to work on that for chord work and improv and seeing the value in traidic thinking. Hoping to make thinking small triad to play bigger sounds.

    Sorry for the Saturday morning, haven't had coffee yet brain dump. Hope some of that makes sense to someone. Now time to make some coffee.

  23. #247

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I actually think a scandalously large amount of it is faking it with tremendous style.
    Woody Allen said "80% of life is just showing up."

    Confidence goes a long way. A terrible line played with panache can sound better than a good line played timidly.

  24. #248

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by docbop
    Sorry for the Saturday morning, haven't had coffee yet brain dump. Hope some of that makes sense to someone. Now time to make some coffee.
    Well it's late afternoon where I am, so I'm not sure what my excuse is.

  25. #249

    User Info Menu

    I have decided I haven’t actually got enough of my life left to start studying CST now. I think I’ll just “keep on buggering on” much as I have done so far (to quote Winston Churchill).

  26. #250

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    I have decided I haven’t actually got enough of my life left to start studying CST now. I think I’ll just “keep on buggering on” much as I have done so far (to quote Winston Churchill).
    There's not all that much to it. For me, it took some time for it to click, but the actual information is something I think most people can learn fairly quickly.

    Application is a whole 'nother ballgame.