-
CST is the opposite of Negative Harmony.
-
12-03-2017 02:04 PM
-
CST is not taught consistently different Instructors have different Presentations.
It is not yet a ' fully integrated Theory'.
I said earlier I was not advanced enough conceptually to use a' Scale ' as a Pitch Collection while Improvising ..I do ' hear' a lot of things and have spent a lot of time getting to be able to Play much/most of what I hear.
But I forgot that I use Parent Keys for Modes so I will use Structures from C Major ( including Arps and the 6 Subset Pentas ) for D Dorian for example , so that is close to a Pitch Collection.
But if Gary Burton was teaching ' Pitch Collection ' he would not have advocated Modes - or needed to.
Most teach that ' this scale works or sounds cool over this chord ' and that ideally you will not play the scale(s) verbatim etc.but juggle order and Intervals and still utilize Target Tones.
Just a coincidence of certain scales having the Chord Tones and Extensions and/ or some cool Chromatic Tones and cataloging them ..nothing wrong with that .
Others say it's a Pitch Collection - but then you wouldn't really need scales as much and of course the idea that you would need to or want to learn modes as separate fingerings would be reduced if they were integrated into the Parent Key Concept.
I personally don't use Modes as separate Fingerings due to that fact - and learned to play vertically so I am not a scaley Player..but for Rhythmic Filler I sometimes play/ hear neutral scales ..why not?
But back to my Point ..
Here we have a really good presentation tieing in
CST with some AST ( arpeggio stacking )
And it looks like a lot of additional Concepts are
Derived NOT from D half Diminished = EbMajor BUT expand the thinking and borrow from the ii Chord of the Parent Key. Though Jack Z. doesn't get into Parent Keys here , I noticed some of his Concepts are borrowed from ii of the Parent Key Eb Major.
He also refers to Vertical Theory
[ AST] and allows chord construction stacked over the Chord of the Moment .
One of my favorite R&B Fusion chords is Minor 11th
( b3 and 4th or 11th included) and I use the Minor 11 b5 a lot 11th in higher octave - not dissonant ) so I already Play the extensions and Arps from those Chords and Others from Standard Vertical Theory [ AST ].
Jack Z's condensed but Integrated Approach makes a lot of sense and combined with the way I USE Parent Key Theory presents a Vast but Clear Picture... IMO and to my mind .
So normally in Classical Theory , D half diminished is vii° in EbMajor so we have a Parent Key to borrow from but we can ALSO borrow from the ii of the Parent Key Fminor and pretend THAT is the Parent Key ...( secondary or Related Parent Key Concept you could say ).
He did not touch upon Parent Keys in that Video but I noticed some of what he used was derived from F minor and I can use all types of Fminor Structures over D minor7 flat five and most sound good.
But Jazz does add Synthetic Scales ( especially Jazz Melodic Minor ) but I was getting those Extensions from Standard Vertical Theory ( AST) anyway without ever needing Jazz Melodic Minor...
So the Grand Theory of Applied Theory Improv . for me is :
Standard Vertical Theory ( AST ) Plus CST Plus Parent Keys Expanded and Pure Ear Playing and using melodic cadences.
The cool thing about AST plus CST plus Parent Keys
is it can also tie together Chord Construction and Progressions / Successions , Modulations etc.
CST by itself is a kind of shorthand still cool to supplement ear but it must be Integrated IMO to lead to deeper understanding , at least from where I see/ hear Music .Last edited by Robertkoa; 12-07-2017 at 01:17 AM.
-
The only remaining issue being - what style that would be, the music you play? Sounds you produce, would they be accepted by standards loving audience, or bossa, or swing ... should you happen to play them in context?
Originally Posted by Robertkoa
-
Now that I may actually know what it is, I think I know the opposite. CST is the opposite of the way Joe Pass picks notes.
-
My wife and I made sample cocktails for what we are serving at Christmas, which is to say I'm drunk, but actually I think you got it.
CST is pretty much the opposite of the way Joe viewed things.
-
The Joe Pass Chord Book, best as I can remember organized harmonies by families.
Major, minor, dominant and perhaps some others. Many different chord types were grouped together.
Best guess: this is indicative of how he organized his melodic approach as well, broad based families of sound.
CST organizes harmony into a larger number of sub categories.
-
Yeah right , Originally Posted by Robertkoa
I too play Fmin stuff over Dmin7b5 ....
In a minor ii V i
I just think of it as playing iv V i
But thanks , I understand/like your explanation
-
I learned my major scale modes off my first jazz teacher ...
They didn't do much for me , I found my way into
functional harmony and to get my ear round tuned much better with arps ...
But that's just me
I note Gary Burton is a superb player , much
better than Ill ever be so
what do I know .... ?
-
I think my point is that Gary Burton's approach to music may not be appropriate for less talented people.
-
Got ya , I don't have amazing ears myself ... Originally Posted by christianm77
I have had/have to 'teach' my ear the various sounds
So , yes I agree with you ...
-
Just trying to imagine almost any of the masters we enjoy going on and on about CST......
-
Originally Posted by boatheelmusic
-
Looks like a Pat Martino instruction sheet.....or a DaVinci sketch....
-
Dm7b5 = Fm6, it does not have to be any more complicated that that. Originally Posted by pingu
However, after realizing above, I would try to keep thinking from D. I could never buy into "over C chord play from G" kind of thing.
If I decide to play on chord, it will be thinking from the "root", just like CST, only when I came to invent "my method" I did not know about modes, let alone their names, so I think of it as "notes from ... (natural) scales tweaked to fit and sound".
It is different if I play on "key", or "tonal center", when for "IIm7b5 V7 Im7", I will tend to think "VIIm7b5 III7 VIm", so I will play from that pool, including parallel Major and whatever, but not forgetting what I'm actually addressing.
All above if I'm actually not going after some melody whirling around my brain, as hazy and vague as it might be.
And more ...
-
CST is the opposite of... this (although stride piano and acoustic rhythm guitar sit comfortably with the CST-based improvising of the trumpet and trombone player who make up our quartet):
-
You see... on one hand.. being a classical guy I would agree with you... I rememeber I wodered why would one need to apply some wierd scale to get alteres sound... I asked: why would not you just play altered notes of the chord you need...? Originally Posted by Vladan
That makes some sense of course.. but first it requires very good understanding and hearing of funcional harmony... and secon one has to be really good at it practically with guitar to do it - as Reg says - at the speed of jazz...
(Playing from more general system is easier than dropping in occasional)
But the most important thing if believe is that - when you think for example 'play G over C' it gives you some new perspective...
because it's in the menatlity.. if you think of 'C major extentions' - mentally you stick around complex C chord - it's not bad.. but I am sure that will lead you some certain artistic dicision or choices...
You have every note in the structure up from C...
And if you think 'G over C' it's like you have a new element.. kind of two layers one of which is basic C - the other one is G - secondary superimposed element..
even if you do not do it conciously it will be reflected in your playing... you begin to develope this 'G' a bit more independently from basic 'C'...
If does not mean taht you totally drop that C out... you still hear it will definitely bring in some other note choices maybe phrasing etc.
The same difference if you just add altered sound to original chord - it will be more like an embelishment - it has occasional character...
If you apply some scale to get certain altered sounds - most probably it may turn this altered sound into more independent element in composition - it turns into bigger scales...
that's why I wrote above that with scales I became to distinct different altered notes as separate elements each with their own colour...
Same thing about chromatics - if you just think it as chromatic fill-in.. it's nothing but ornamentational fill in... it will be hardly developed except as it is.. a chromatics.
if you play it from pov of some scales or harmonies implied - there's a chance that you hear some other idea behind it which would show in your playing and maybe even developed in impro..
To me this is what all this scales thing in appalication to standards is about... if you apply it to standarad you play the same thing in general maybe but since you approach it from different percpective it will probably lead you to some musical choices that would hardly happen if you played strictly from tonality for example...
-
Great, I clicked on that and now I summoned Pazuzu. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Lol. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Wait....that looks like the Lydian Ouiga Board that came with George Russell's Book...
-
You got to be careful with that stuff. Powerful juju.
-
Coltrane drew that Originally Posted by boatheelmusic
-
The Coltrane diagram has been extremely helpful for me.
Maybe one day I'll make a post about it... it's a lot of info to go over.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
All good points. I have no will to address them in any meaningful manner. However, I'm opinion based guy, like some people think they can hear sound of CST, I think I can hear sound of "layering" and must say, to say I do not like it is one great euphemism. For me, that is the sound of '80s-'90s fusion - rock, from Toto to Metheny and all in between and around, with one single note of distancing, that is -- Metheny is really freakin' good. I do not like those harmonies almost as much as I do not like the sound of perfectly matched scales shredded over them. All in all, that is something I always associated with and colloquially called "Berkley Sound". I do not know why, just somehow I happened to think, "... this shit these guys play, it must be that Berkley thing everybody's talking that I know nothing about. It surely does sound perfectly nice, sophisticated, layered and matched, like they all play in different keys, still it all fits perfectly and they do shred like mad, with an effect that overall it sounds like polished thurd ... . " Originally Posted by Jonah
In the meantime I learned about Berkley people who sound nothing like above described, who sound genuinely good, so guess I'll have to rethink internal nomenclature.
Really, my point is, I don't think G over C method can produce many interesting sounds. On another hand, many people in this world like Toto. Very few people like my music.
-
I learned that I could play all white keys, more or less, against a G7 before I learned what a mixolydian was.
I usually think chord tones, tonal center background, tensions and avoids. At least, when I'm thinking about it.
On the bandstand, I try not to think, but when I have to (to avoid clams) it's usually chord tones, a general feeling of tonal center, and the rest by ear. Mix in a handful of licks, tricks and quotes.
The good part is that the fewer rules I'm thinking about, the freer I am to create melody. The bad part is that I screw up more often than I'd like and hit notes I don't intend, including some clams.
-
I've gigged and jammed a lot more this year than I have in probably 30 years. One thing I've learned is not to visibly react to my clams. I used to generally make a face when I wiffed. What I discovered is that the only people who notice them are other musicians. And even they miss them most of the time because they're not paying attention. By grimacing I was calling attention to the mistake. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Obviously this doesn't help when you're hitting a clam on every other note, but for the occasional klanger, just don't react, and odds are nobody will have even noticed it.
Reply With Quote
There will be another you changes
Today, 02:06 AM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions