Chord scale theory is the opposite of...

[Dana]

CST seems to bring out the wordsmith in people.

Oh, it's not just CST that does that. If you ask a question on the internet you'll usually get three types of answers: 1) Some folks legitimately trying to help, 2) Some folks who answer their own questions with long bursts of text, and 3) Random gibberish.

Have you tried playing the suggested scales over the first 8 bars of Dolphin Dance? Where are you stuck?

Dolphin Dance is a unique tune. Perhaps that it's through composed is confusing you? Have you tried analyzing more key centered tunes before this?

I remember when I first tried to analyze this tune, I was confused why the key signature didn't seem to reflect what was going on in the chords.

[rpjazzguitar]

Oh, it's not just CST that does that. If you ask a question on the internet you'll usually get three types of answers: 1) Some folks legitimately trying to help, 2) Some folks who answer their own questions with long bursts of text 3) Random gibberish

Have you tried playing the suggested scales over the first 8 bars of Dolphin Dance? Where are you stuck now?

Dolphin Dance is a unique tune. Perhaps that it's through composed is confusing you? Have you tried analyzing more straight forward tunes before this?

I don't have any trouble playing on Dolphin Dance. I posted an explanation of how I think about the first 10 bars, which the idea that was enough to begin a discussion to find out if a CST theorist might have a different approach. Several posters have been kind enough to take the time to explain their approach.

There had been commentary to the effect that some tunes are more appropriate for CST approaches than others. Frankly, I don't know where Dolphin Dance sits in that spectrum. Apparently, there are tunes which can be analyzed perfectly well without CST (even though CST would work) and others for which CST is reported to be very helpful. If Dolphin Dance isn't an example of the latter, I hope someone will chime in with a better example. I picked Dolphin Dance because the chord changes aren't simple.

[Dana]

I don't have any trouble playing on Dolphin Dance. I posted an explanation of how I think about the first 10 bars, which the idea that was enough to begin a discussion to find out if a CST theorist might have a different approach. Several posters have been kind enough to take the time to explain their approach.

There had been commentary to the effect that some tunes are more appropriate for CST approaches than others. Frankly, I don't know where Dolphin Dance sits in that spectrum. Apparently, there are tunes which can be analyzed perfectly well without CST (even though CST would work) and others for which CST is reported to be very helpful. If Dolphin Dance isn't an example of the latter, I hope someone will chime in with a better example. I picked Dolphin Dance because the chord changes aren't simple.

Personally, I think any tune can be analyzed using a CST approach. In school it was called harmonic analysis/chord-scale analysis. Like puzzles, some are more challenging than others. In the end I just pick a direction and go.

To be honest, I can't tell if you're looking for help or not. So I'll just wish you good luck.

[christianm77]

If Out of Nowhere is red, and Inner Urge is... I dunno... Indigo? Dolphin Dance is, IMO green.

But maybe someone will tell me that Inner Urge is actually all ii-V-I subs I haven't spotted.

[christianm77]

Personally, I think any tune can be analyzed using a CST approach. In school it was called harmonic analysis/chord-scale analysis. Like puzzles, some are more challenging than others. In the end I just pick a direction and go.

To be honest, I can't tell if you're looking for help or not. So I'll just wish you good luck.

I think the point was some tunes can only take a chord/scale approach.

Or at least that's the most obvious route. Whereas if I play a ii-V-I etc based tune I need to rely less on vertical shit and play through the changes in a more intuitive way that honours the movement without being slavish to the changes.

But then it's possible that the reason I can do that on those tunes is familiarity....

Non functional harmony always sounded like a cop out to me... There's nothing random about the chord movements in Inner Urge for instance. Some people say Jobim is non-functional, which is bollocks.

If the changes are both unfamiliar and change rapidly, the most intelligent and musical thing you can do is often to play triads. So full circle?

[rpjazzguitar]

I think the point was some tunes can only take a chord/scale approach.

Or at least that's the most obvious route. Whereas if I play a ii-V-I etc based tune I need to rely less on vertical shit and play through the changes in a more intuitive way that honours the movement without being slavish to the changes.

But then it's possible that the reason I can do that on those tunes is familiarity....

Non functional harmony always sounded like a cop out to me... There's nothing random about the chord movements in Inner Urge for instance. Some people say Jobim is non-functional, which is bollocks.

If the changes are both unfamiliar and change rapidly, the most intelligent and musical thing you can do is often to play triads. So full circle?

Full circle it is. With my intentions in the thread now being questioned, I think I'll stop at this point.

Thanks to everyone who contributed. I ended up learning a good deal about CST (from the posts and by following up with the Berklee materials on-line) and a good deal about how people think about it. Much appreciated!

[Dana]

I think the point was some tunes can only take a chord/scale approach.

Perhaps I'm confusing playing scalular with harmonic analysis.

Either way, I don't know if I agree that some tunes can only take a chord/scale approach. Which tunes are those?

If anything, I'd say the opposite would be true. Playing over the A section of Confirmation I would definitely not be thinking CST. I'd be playing bebop (chord tones and approaches).

If I were playing Windows, then I'd use a more scalular approach.

I'm sure more advanced players could do more, but that's where I am at this point.

[christianm77]

Perhaps I'm confusing playing scalular with harmonic analysis.

Either way, I don't know if I agree that some tunes can only take a chord/scale approach. Which tunes are those?

If anything, I'd say the opposite would be true. Playing over the A section of Confirmation I would definitely not be thinking CST. I'd be playing bebop (chord tones and approaches).

If I were playing Windows, then I'd use a more scalular approach.

That's what I mean. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear....

Windows would have a more CST approach.

Confirmation - I could take more of a CST approach as colour... For instance, I could really emphasise the Bb7#11 sound using lydian dominant, which is not something I would normally tend to do.

Third option? Now, because I am unsatisfied with having to sound 'CST' on the more CST tunes - I'm interested in moving towards unifying my playing and getting more bebop on the 'non-functional tunes' (as I am playing more non-functional stuff with bands) at the same time as being able to play in a more scalic way on functional tunes.

Barry Harris provides one useful bridge between a scale approach and a language approach and gets out of that II-V-I lick conceptual prison. I'm starting to see some results with this. BH can be used within CST, actually to build scales out into bebop language. You are not limited to doing this within conventional standards harmony.

Barry would be horrified lol. Hates modal jazz.

[matt.guitarteacher]

My current inclination is to consider the possibility that a lot of the CST mystique is unnecessarily arcane terminology and categorization of material which is amenable to simpler explanations.

If you've never checked out Bert Ligon's jazz theory resources books, they are well worth having for reasons other than CST for sure. He's not really a "CST guy", but he covers philosophical approaches to chord-scale stuff, in the broader context of learning to play jazz. If it's any consolation, he covers the chord scale stuff in *VOLUME 2*, way after a vast amount of more straightforward traditional approach stuff. And that's really the deal, ....what's been said all along. It's not really a BEGINNER approach. It's about finding new colors etc. That's how he characterizes the scales anyway: just different color variations.

It really isn't something to REPLACE traditional approaches, I feel like the conversation keeps going back to trying to make it that . Certainly isn't something which seems "amenable to simpler explanations", as you're talking about above. Traditional approaches would be : traditional harmony in the vanilla sense, blues, then Chromatic embellishment using Triad generalization (tonic triad of key), then chromatic embellishment using harmonic specificity (chord of the moment), then maybe much later these other scales. At least that's the way he lays it out.

For CST type approaches, you can use the third, fourth, fifth, and 7th degrees of melodic minor over dominant chords to give you different "colors" for dominant scale approaches for example. There are other modes of harmonic minor, harmonic major, symmetrical scales etc. which you can simply "sub in" for dominant. there are various "substitute scales" you can play over other chord types as well.

If you're a pretty decent player in the first place - bored out of your skull with more basic traditional approaches (like what most of us other STUDENTS are working on - this is probably going to sound like crap, but THAT doesn't mean that other really great players don't use this stuff. Anyway, most of us can work on some basics of it as well. Anyone can play the third mode of melodic minor over major 7 chords, or altered over dominant. Locrian #2 is pretty vanilla coverage of half diminished....

But again, honestly, most of us skimp on basic language , and more fundamental methods for targeting chord tones chromatically or otherwise, BEFORE talking about this stuff. When you start delving into vanilla chromatic approaches, a lot of these other outside sounds become much easier to hear and negotiate. Honestly, even altered sounds like crap when you don't know how to play them. But that's vanilla jazz for decades now?

I think it's easy to look at the most BASIC examples of CST scale usage in these methods and come to the conclusion that you could easily arrive at it another way, but that's not really the point. I don't think people get into it to learn how to play altered on a dominant or Lydian dominant etc. I think that's just beginning stuff.

Honestly, I would look at getting into some basic harmony from someone like Bert Ligon as more of a starting point. If we're ringing our hands over the "meaning of CST" at some point in our development, then we probably don't NEED it at that point. At the same time, I think it's a little silly to dismiss something that we don't understand, simply BECAUSE we don't understand it. Everything in life is not the emperor's new clothes. Sometimes we're just not there yet. Personally, I can live with a good bit of that for myself.

[destinytot]

Have you ever received advice which you knew perfectly well was excellent, and yet, you couldn't bring yourself to follow it?

My current inclination is to consider the possibility that a lot of the CST mystique is unnecessarily arcane terminology and categorization of material which is amenable to simpler explanations.

But, I've also lived long enough to be suspicious of my own tendency to want to dismiss things I don't understand as nonsense. So, I'm trying to get to the bottom of it.

I wouldn't call CST 'nonsense' myself; on the contrary, the concept 'modal interchange' has enabled me to make perfect 'sense' of - and prepare 'roadmaps' for - some terrific progressions (Soul).

I've posted about his book, but here's (former?) member JohnnyPac with some more grist to the mill:
Free Video Lessons - Chord-Scale Theory and Linear Harmony for Guitar: Creative Tools for Improvisation and Composition in Contemporary MusicJonathan "JonnyPac" Pac Cantin - Guitarist - Composer - Artist - Educator

[Stevebol]

I'd rather listen to egghead CST music than current pop.

[Vladan]

Whichever. I'm simply trying to understand how people are using CST. But, I am frustrated by the language, so I'm suggesting absolutely concrete examples of applications. Which tune? Which chords? Which notes? And why.

Thus far, I have been unable to understand to my satisfaction many of the more abstract comments, but the musical examples (exactly which notes to play at a specific bar in a specific tune) are not opaque at all.

A theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking. Depending on the context, the results might, for example, include generalized explanations of how nature works. Wikipedia

[destinytot]

I'd rather listen to egghead CST music than current pop.

I'd choose pop - partly because the videos are fun:

[christianm77]

[destinytot]

Not sure if I heard that first line correctly (but it made me laugh).

[Stevebol]

I'd choose pop - partly because the videos are fun:

It's not for me. I'll be sticking with non-commercial rock.

[Robertkoa]

Never heard that Rhianna Song before but I suspect if most of you heard Diana Krall sing it
over the same track with just a few Piano and/ or
Guitar fills here and there...
You'd call Jazz or Jazz/ Pop..right ?

Remembering - that how someone 'hears' something is how they 'hear' it- no right or wrong , obviously ...

[destinytot]

Never heard that Rhianna Song before but I suspect if most of you heard Diana Krall sing it
over the same track with just a few Piano and/ or
Guitar fills here and there...
You'd call Jazz or Jazz/ Pop..right ?

Remembering - that how someone 'hears' something is how they 'hear' it- no right or wrong , obviously ...

And it's ripe for CST.

[Reg]

Here is an older version I posted on this forum of Dolphin Dance.... example of how I used CST as an analytical tool to help create a harmonic feel... not really jazz, but at least an example...

[Robertkoa]

@ destinytot -Yeah, I believe you ...as someone who is learning about and absorbing some Jazz to write and Play 'better ' R&B ..

Everything from Jazz seems to apply (!).



Jazz and R&B ( especially 'Composed' R&B that has Harmony / Changes Keys etc. ) are or can be very close Cousins- you Beboppers don't even have to change your Rhythms ....

Because I use Bebop Rhythms in my lines...and hard swing ..it's actually easier to solo ..move around and mix horizontal and vertical ( Outer Limits again ).

This Thread was great for me because It gave me a window into CST as pitch collection AND made me realize that since I play Vertically more and think in Roman Numerals ..that I personally don't need other than Vanilla + Arps and Related Functions of those two.

I hear pitch collections vertically as other Related or interpolated Arps ..

[destinytot]

@ destinytot -Yeah, I believe you ...as someone who is learning about and absorbing some Jazz to write and Play 'better ' R&B ..

Everything from Jazz seems to apply (!).



Jazz and R&B ( especially 'Composed' R&B that has Harmony / Changes Keys etc. ) are or can be very close Cousins- you Beboppers don't even have to change your Rhythms ....

Can't beat a good Soul, Funk, R&B or reggae groove (imo).

[mr. beaumont]

Here is an older version I posted on this forum of Dolphin Dance.... example of how I used CST as an analytical tool to help create a harmonic feel... not really jazz, but at least an example...

I like how connected to the blues this is...nice counter argument to folks who say CST is all floaty and no blues and whatever B.S.

Can I pick your brain, Reg? Those last four chords of the form...I've been trying to figure out what I hear as opposed to what charts tell me (The Real Book for this one is awful, for example)

Right now, I'm liking: Eb7sus, Bb13b9/Eb, C/Eb, G7alt...

[Reg]

[Robertkoa]

I like how connected to the blues this is...nice counter argument to folks who say CST is all floaty and no blues and whatever B.S.

Can I pick your brain, Reg? Those last four chords of the form...I've been trying to figure out what I hear as opposed to what charts tell me (The Real Book for this one is awful, for example)

Right now, I'm liking: Eb7sus, Bb13b9/Eb, C/Eb, G7alt...

And that nice Vibrato ( on an Archtop ...yeah ) doesn't hurt either...

If someone is really good at CST we won't probably even know they are using it....

I noticed a Guy on Youtube, Rich Severson ..a really smooth Chord Melody and Swing Player...calling out some scales to his Students ...he's like "Mr Smooth and Relaxed ".too fluid to Telegraph IF he actually uses that Technique himself or not...but he knows it .

[mr. beaumont]

And that nice Vibrato ( on an Archtop ...yeah ) doesn't hurt either...

If someone is really good at CST we won't probably even know they are using it....

Exactly...it's just an organization system, not a "method." If you treat it as a literal "play this over this" method, of course it sounds lousy.