-
Oh, yeah, this from Rameau's wikipedia page:
Treatise on Harmony, 1722
Rameau's 1722 Treatise on Harmony initiated a revolution in music theory. Rameau posited the discovery of the "fundamental law" or what he referred to as the "fundamental bass" of all Western music. Heavily influenced by new Cartesian modes of thought and analysis, Rameau's methodology incorporated mathematics, commentary, analysis and a didacticism that was specifically intended to illuminate, scientifically, the structure and principles of music. With careful deductive reasoning, he attempted to derive universal harmonic principles from natural causes.[Previous treatises on harmony had been purely practical; Rameau embraced the new philosophical rationalism, quickly rising to prominence in France as the "Isaac Newton of Music." His fame subsequently spread throughout all Europe, and his Treatise became the definitive authority on music theory, forming the foundation for instruction in western music that persists to this day.
(My emphasis)
I'm not dismissing his work, I'm pointing out that there is a separation between a theory of music and practical instruction.
In applying Enlightenment philosophy to music, Rameau elevates music as a field of academic study above being a mere trade.
BTW conservatoires were not historically places of academic study - they were places where children would go to serve an apprenticeship. This carried on until quite recently. Olivier Messiaen was admitted to the Paris Conservatoire aged 11.
So the modern academic system maps poorly to the training given to classical composers as well as to jazz musicians. Berklee does about a good job as can be possible with this system, but we all know the best musicians don't really go to Berklee or where-ever to learn to play, they turn up having already mastered the tradition.
Anyway, nothing wrong with what Rameau did of course, I just think we need to think about whether we are in the theory or practice of music.
Now when it comes to CST - beyond Aebersold beginner's stuff - I see it more as an analytical theory, or a way of understanding things, not so much a practical approach that allows you to play the language. There are no (IIRC) examples of jazz language in the Nettles/Graf CST book, it's mostly classical stuff actually.
But maybe I am wrong.Last edited by christianm77; 11-27-2017 at 09:59 AM.
-
11-27-2017 09:21 AM
-
Yea... like I said... most of these concepts are not for guitarist, and you need to be able to see and hear music from notation.... be able to hear the written music on the page etc...
And what I said way back in my 1st post on this thread....
Yea...same old discussions. Most don't really have an understanding of what CST is about because they don't have an understanding of traditional music theory and functional harmony... but who really cares.
Personally I would suggest putting your time in actually getting your technical, the physical aspects together on your instrument.
Just like actually understanding music theory usually requires..... actual composition realization, arranging and basic orchestration. Going from academia or theoretical simulation to real world practice or whatever one calls the differences. Anyway... developing musicianship on your instrument will be more useful usage of time for most.
I mean how many on this forum can, without rehearsing, play all the very basic scales, arpeggios, chords and all the inversions etc from the three minors... Maj/min. Harmonic min and melodic minor. Any key...Anywhere on your guitar...This requires proficiency on your instrument. Yea...Without starring at your guitar.
How many can sight read a guitar part... transpose a tune you don't know on stage... etc... these are all standard skills that can easily be developed and there isn't any real wrong way... you can do it or you can't.
I would also say... How many on this forum can actually comp through tunes. Beyond playing in a child's basic style. (I don't mean Billy Child's), Really... practice playing through jazz tunes in chord melody style. Develop the skill to improvise with chords and chord patterns... with melodies on top. Not worked out memorized etc... which will lead to being able to hear chords, harmony... and then some of these newer concepts might be useful .
-
Reg I don’t really understand the way you look at music theoretically* (I’m sure I could if I put in the time) but I do appreciate your approach is fundamentally practical.
Your advice above is pretty much what I would give everyone.
I kind of feel as if academia is a waste of time when it comes to learning to play. Do, don’t theorise. Play triads through the tune. Run your scales in intervals. Listen to phrases and repeat. Practice reading. Write music. And so on.
I wish I’d understood this more clearly, earlier but in the past few years focussing on really drilling the fundamentals my actual command of my instrument has vastly improved. I’m losing those blind alleys and corners on the fretboard. I can put together things on the guitar much quicker.
You have to be really thorough. But you can make a start with ten minutes a day.
The actual ins and outs of the material may vary from teacher to teacher but the nature of that material is pretty consistent.
(* what might be fun is if I were to analyse your lines using my theoretical approach haha.)
-
Hey Christian... yea I have always tried to be extremely practical...
Talking about music generally doesn't do much at gigs, usually just basic verbal comments to que possibilities when playing, depending on levels of musicianship etc...
Basically... we can play or we can't. There are many different approaches that seem to all work. I've just noticed over the years, that some work better than others.
-
My comments about being able to comp... are real. Most guitarist just can't cover.
-
The reading part is something I definitely want to pick up the pace on. I'd assume that, like everything else, you were somewhat systematic with your approach to learning to read in position? How did you approach this originally, or how do you recommend others approach? Do you camp out in a single position for a while and learn to read there better before moving elsewhere? Do you practice reading each thing in more than one position?
Originally Posted by Reg
-
I agree. Although that’s not just to do with voicing, but you need voicings to be flexible. Originally Posted by Reg
One regret I have in my professional life is that I don’t do enough comping (in the modern sense) - I would like to do more as it is perhaps the most interesting thing in jazz.
-
I think people who don’t do many gigs with pro players don’t realise this. (Sorry convoluted sentence.) Originally Posted by Reg
Occasionally in rehearsal someone might say - ‘what are you playing over this?’ or something like that...
-
I'd shorten it just to say "a" gig. Originally Posted by christianm77
I mean, how can you possibly talk about music at a gig? You've got to have your concept together beforehand. Sink or swim, then, I guess.
-
Hey Matt,
I worked on rhythms, the Bellson books or something like. Rhythm by it's self.
Then all the patterns on the neck. I used the 7 position approach to being able to finger scales, arps... anything. The point is to already be aware of melodic patterns and be able to recognize them. Just like rhythms.
You become aware of phrasing from different positions or fingerinings etc...
So I get past the the note or chord of the moment. Or like being in the moment, but the moment is a few bars etc...
Sight reading is being able to recognize what's coming... and being able to be ahead of the music.
Early on...I would make quick note of form, range of music etc... and then these aspects also become recognizable. And your skills of being able to move around the neck while looking at chart or other players becomes standard. If your glued to the chart, you also miss things.
It's like the other skills... organized practice works.
Yea the comping thing also take basic organization... being aware of what charts imply. The basic changes on most charts are just a start and many times... just wrong. Different styles of music imply different harmonic organization.
The basic trick to comping in a jazz style... is to become aware of what chord patterns are implied by single chords notated on charts.
And then how to use them while keeping the harmonic intent implied with balance. The balance would reflect the context...
I'm a very simple player... I use only a few basic voicing and patterns of voicings to cover most tunes.
I have two basic collection of voicings for any chord. The first is organized with chord tones on top, the next is with extensions, blue notes and embellishments. I generally use in arpeggio like style with melodic embellishments, just like playing melodic lines.
I have targets and approach them, or create relationships and develop ... basic improv.
-
Understand that on this Thread I am attempting and
finally understanding the fundamental illogic for most People of using CST - especially as a
" Pitch Collection".
I don't play or sound like a 'Student' even Playing ' Jazz' and this is because of Time Feel and Fluidity
AND that I play by improvising and while Improvising
I can frequently ' pre hear ' the Ending of the line I am
Playing - stay with me -.
So I can put nice Melodic Cadences that go right TO the Target Chord this way even on fairly outrageous lines ( lol ).
The Melodic Cadences are merely a usually two or three note Pattern of chord tones and or extensions or from the Parent Chord.
In experimental Improv. I am experimenting with
taking a Bar or Two sometimes a Bar and a Half etc. line -sometimes longer line and FORCING it to land in other Harmonic Regions , some distant some closer .
I ALWAYS need chord tones and extensions FROM the Destination Chord to accomplish this new Destination.
They do not have to be the same Destination Arp they can be Related Arps and Arp Fragments - but they will be of course heard relative to the Destination C.O.M.
So IF someone is using CST as a Pitch Collection-
fine but they still must use Chord Tones and extensions to tie their lines Harmonically /Vertically to the Music.
Actual Melodies of Songs are almost all Chord Tones and extensions - the cool thing about Classical and especially Jazz and Fusion is we can chromaticize the heck out of everything.
So it is very difficult I think for especially Guitarists to use a Scale AS a pitch collection because we play scales as exercises and the Scale Notes are not as apparent as on a Keyboard AS a Collection to most of us ( especially ME ).
But IF CST in it's proper usage IS pitch collections-
it is easier for ME and I suspect most Guitarists to think of and 'hear' target arpeggios AND related arpeggios ( like relative major relative minor Arps and bVII Major over i minor etc etc ).
Now I am trying to cram a bunch of Theory (which I mostly neglected for a long long time ) into a year or two ...but it's working well ..and I have the Brain Trust
here ..which has been extremely helpful ( Thanks very much for this !).
So I was using CST just to stay Diatonic -Modes and Subset Pentatonics just to get me instantly and AVOIDING extra fingerings other than the Arp Voicings which are the Same Voicings I Play as Chords - lol.
I do not have separate ARP fingerings - I play across the Strings of the Voicings I already use-
Yes - I will flunk Music School - but it sounds good..lol.
*And no extra fingerings.
*This may not work for Others I am NOT a qualified Instructor ( except technique )- nor suggesting this for others..
So IF a Guitarist is advanced mentally enough ( which I am not lol ) to use CST as Pitch Collections - great.
But thinking / 'hearing 'Arps and fragments gets you to a similar Place - which is what the more advamced and most of you have been saying ..way earlier in this Thread ..lol - I just got it now .
I was playing vertically long ago Post Steely Dan but never fully integrated everything as I am doing now or had the Fluidity.
In actual Improv . once again I am Playing mostly by 'ear' but using Parent Keys ( modes but using more structures ) and enharmonic Pentas ..and 'Pre Hearing' especially the ends of each line - so WHAT I pre hear is usually/ often an Arp Triad or an Arp[ 1 3rd 7th- for example is a very strong one ] of the Destination Chord or C.O.M.
Those I play in different order especially 1 b3 b7 for example on a minor no matter what you played before any combination of that - bam - it makes sense.
So any Arp Pitch Collection including Arps a Fifth away etc. will ' work' and is far easier for me to find 'hear' and Target on the fly so to speak.
I thought CST was using Parent Keys / Modes and related / enharmonic Pentas to start Diatonic ..
THEN Roman Numeral them ( or play from the Third etc ) for special and more Chromatic effects..which seems to be what many teach ( though I have extremely limited direct experience with Guitar Instructors ) .
Berkee Books had this in them right ?
So CST won't work too well as an Advanced Concept
[ As a Pitch Collection ]for most Guitarists unless they are already really good at Improv already AND ' 'hear well'- DURING Improvisation.
Which is why most Guitarists ( including Me ) use CST in a Rudimentary way - lucky for me I never tried to use it for 'cool' notes - just to stay Diatonic and for 'safe spots '.
The only reason my 'scales' sound good now is I am sticking vertical stuff in there with them and pre hearing vertical endings.
OR I am starting vertical and adding linear stuff .
George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept - I used to joke that only 13.7 People understood it - now it is up to over 43 People ( I am not one of them ).
The Major and Minor Pentas are more consonant
and Perfect Sounding and than Lydian to my ears
anyway .
And the Major Scale and the #IV Pentatonic equal
the entire Chromatic Scale ...
So Pentas can be used to go from Inside to Outside
and " All points in between " really quickly .
And Guitarists from Rock Pop and Country know Pentas well enough to Possibly think of them as a Pitch Collection and NOT always play them in alphabetical order .
As I've mentioned many times Pentas are the Only Diatonic Scale with all Chord Tones and extensions- no fat to trim off - ( yes there is one Tone Missing but it's the same Penta a Fourth up or a Fifth up ).
So much of what I said should be included on the
Yellow Warning Label Sticker on the CST Book- right ?
As always - what do I have wrong ?
Sorry about the length of this Post( kind of) - I mean I understand it's tedious and owe you all Money for sorting it out - ha ha.
@Matt - thanks for the clarification earlier.( you were right I did not even know CST is a pitch collection .)
@Christian -with Students ( including me ) I like your 'Caution' knowing that we are mostly going to play the scale NOT as a pitch collection - the idea of only Playing One Octave - never saw that before .
@Mr B below - thanks ..the difference is you have been already doing this for X years and I am really only doing it since last Tuesday lol or really this year .
Good Info on what to do on the tough spots.Last edited by Robertkoa; 11-27-2017 at 04:31 PM.
-
Yea there are lots of standard approaches for playing Jazz... yours is one of them. Somewhat a extension or modified functional approach.
Would be cool to hear you play... I like your style etc...
-
Yeah, I have the 7-position thing together at at a basic level, and I appreciate all of your insight on this approach. It's helped me tremendously. It's really odd how a few things about it, which were deal breakers for me early on, have come to be some of the most important aspects for me. Like that phrygian fingering off yours... :-) not simply filler. Really helps with contextualizing chromatics/blue notes in other positions as well. Originally Posted by Reg
I also like that the 2nd finger reference generally solves the mental problems of unisons and "where to play X chromatic" which I used to have in given positions. I mean you can still use others if you want, but you always have a default which is concrete to start.
-
I think the issue is looking for CST to be something polar-ly opposite of what you're doing... Originally Posted by Robertkoa
I mean, my concept is similar...and I'm a guy defending the idea of CST...
I mean, if we're talking concepts...I'll go even simpler...
A tune basically (almost always) has points of rest and points of tension...Pretty much always in "functional" tunes, but you hear it in tunes like Tony Williams' "Pee Wee" too, even if things aren't in common 4 bar chunks...
So my quick analysis of any tune is to figure out where those points of rest are, and how I'm going to get through to them. Everything else is just sort of reading between the lines...any oddball chords that need to be handled with care? Any long stretches of one chord that can be looked at as several? Any stretches of several chords that can be looked at as one? That sort of thing.
Occasionally, for me, looking at a chord scale option is a ticket into a tricky change, or a change I can't put into a functional box. But as you said, all the important things don't change...and I might still visualize arpeggios when practicing it even though I'm thinking about theose arpeggios belonging to a certain "scale."
It's just not all that different.
-
Thanks Reg - I don't play Standards but I play a Style which is like Smooth Jazz but Rough -R&B simpler than most Standards ( I did not grow up on them and can do more interesting stuff on Harmonically Expanded R&B it still Modulates though with strong Harmonic Rhythms - my fortè and cool voicings on Guitar ). Originally Posted by Reg
So I will be programming and Recording in 2018 and everyone will hear it .
I want to get Music in the can on the slim chance that it is well received...I think that many talented Guitarists in 'smooth Jazz ' will realize that they do NOT need to play' down ' to their Audience..I am amazed that they have not realized this yet .
( shhhh don't tell them ).
I can hear a lot of R&B in your Time Feel when you Play...
2018 I will be doing preproduction and more writing.
I have written for Vocals before -never Instrumentals.
It's what I call Harmonically Expanded R&B..IF it is really good and well received it will make the Smooth
Jazz Guitarists wonder why they play down to their Audience.
My Rhythm Tracks ,Rhythm Guitar , and Solos will be far 'rougher ' than most 'smooth Jazz' but I like Norman Brown including his writing.
Luckily for me he never uses his 5th and 6th Gear...lol. I have them and do use them -Last edited by Robertkoa; 11-27-2017 at 04:44 PM.
-
I have a friend who designs disk drive controllers for mainframe computers -- and can explain how they work in simple enough terms that I can understand it, even though I have no background in that field.
Which brings me to CST. A lot of the posts seem to require a glossary -- and each attempt to explain an earlier post invariably introduces new terms I don't understand.
I find it frustrating, because I know that CST has proved useful to some great players, and I am always trying to improve my command of the jazz language. But, I've read lots of posts, and read/skimmed Nettles and Graf, and I'm still looking for somebody to take a tune like Wine and Roses and break it down bar by bar in CST, so that I can figure out what the hell it is.
All this loosely defined terminology without concrete example just whizzes by, over my head.
-
I could pound in a nail with a crescent wrench, but I'd rather use a hammer. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
Me too Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
I mean if I was 'applying CST ideas' to Wine and Roses it would be very much in the mode (pun intended) of extending those very functional harmonies into chord scales and then breaking those up into US triads, intervals, all that fun stuff.
So these are the standard changes:
Fmaj7 | Eb7 | D7 | % |
Gm7 | % | Bbm6 | % |
Now I've heard many CST literate players talk about the melody as an extension of the basic chords. It's my belief that this is something that started life as a notational convention to ensure the accompanist didn't mess up the singer etc. But CST players (AFAIK) will preserve the extension that the melody creates with the chord in their scalic choices.
Fmaj7 | Eb7#11 | D7alt | % |
Gm9 | % | Bbm(maj7) | Eb7 |
(the real book chart suggest some chromatic voice leading on the D7. I would opt for at least D7b9 here to intensify the resolution to Gm7, and I'll make it a full altered chord.
This gives these chord scales.
F ionian (or lyd) | Eb lyd dom | D7alt | % |
G dorian | % | Bb melodic minor | % |
(Jonathan Kreisberg says use F Harmonic Major on Bbm(maj7) BTW - I think he's also thinking of the alteration to the key to some extent.)
Now you may ask, isn't that just normal? Well if I was doing things the bop way, I would make different choices, basically ignore the upper extensions suggested by the melody.Last edited by christianm77; 11-27-2017 at 04:02 PM.
-
I guess what I'm saying with my rather curt "hammer/wrench" comment is "Wine and Roses" is not a tune where I'd approach things with CST. It's a straightforward, functional tune. You could "square peg" it, I suppose, but you're not uncovering anything that isn't right there in the melody and changes...
Well, heck, the melody and changes are always the first point of attack, anyway...right?
Now, if anyone wants to dip into the afforementioned "Pee Wee" with me...let's do it...because that tune's giving me some FITS!
-
Jeff, that's almost the exact sentence I use with students when pointing out that modal concepts aren't always ideal for explaining tunes written from the basis of tonal, functional harmony. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
CreScenT wrench... Originally Posted by PMB
-
It's been right there in front of us the whole time! I'm sure the Freemasons or the Illuminati are involved somehow. Originally Posted by destinytot
CreScenT wrench...
I think if I were a teacher, I might be inclined, if a student were to ask about CST, to give them something like "Days of Wine and Roses" and tell them to use CST on it. Then in the next lesson we'd talk about why it sounded terrible.
(Of course, this might be why I'm not a teacher.)
-
As far as wrenches and hammers go ...
I'm not saying I understand when to use CST, or when not.
In fact, what I'm saying is that I can't grasp what is - and by extension I have no idea how or when to use it.
So, I'll take your word for it that it isn't a good tool for Wine and Roses and that it is for Pee Wee, a tune I don't know.
But, pointing out that Wine and Roses isn't appropriate is more of pointing out what CST isn't. Perhaps eventually I'll figure out what's left and that will be CST.
Apparently, I can't even pose the question appropriately. But, what I'm trying to get to is a well annotated example of the application of CST. I understand and appreciate Christian's analysis of Wine and Roses but, from what I glean from other posts, CST goes well beyond what Christian was kind enough to cover.
Meanwhile, can anyone point me to an example where somebody takes a tune and explains, in detail, how to apply CST to it?
-
I'd have to dig to find specific example, but put Reg's YouTube channel on and check out what he does with harmony. The point is and only to find scales which sound good over Am7 or whatever only. Very often it's about finding approach tones to that chord. E altered sounds great over it , but not because it's consonant and harmonious with that chord. You have to resolve it, but it works for the same reason that other chromatic "outside" sounds work over any chord. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
It works for the same reasons that Em7 or F#m7b5 and other "inside" approaches may work as well. Jazz isn't just about what sounds consonant over a chord. It's very often about approaches. There's so much talk in these conversations about what skills "work" over certain changes, almost as ifwe would put chromatics approaches in a different category, were we to bring them up. Why does G sharp or D# sometimes "work" over a Am7? They very often do.
You can organize chromatics for non-chromatic approach tones into one category : "things that sound good", or you can organize in other ways. One way is to use outside harmony, like entire note collections as your starting point. That's what CST is really about. Finding "something else". It isn't about playing Dorian over minor seven chord. That's the biggest problem about ALL conversations with CST .
I can post cheesy amateur examples as well, but that would be silly when are great examples out there . Check out his YouTube channel.
-
Is that Reg523 on youtube? Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
>>.You can organize chromatics for non-chromatic approach tones into one category <<<
Huh?
Reply With Quote
"Gibson" Gold Trapeze Tailpiece from...
Today, 09:05 PM in For Sale