-
So Matt warlock, has some great very detailed Pentatonic material in the beginners or starting out sections. It's well organized, and I would recommend checking it out...
I don't totally agree with much of his approach because we use different fingering systems, I believe the system needs to be 12 fret based and work with whatever basic fingering system one uses for a basic reference.
The other part of approach is his harmonic relationships to references, I believe Matt is still classically based... nothing wrong, but I have different references, which have different relationship results.
I just use basically 4 Pentatonic patterns...
The standard Maj/ Min. Cmaj. C D E G A, and the rest of the modes, or patterns starting on each note. The most common would be....
Amin A C D E G
The other pattern I use is the Mixo or Dorian patterns. So Amin pentatonic becomes A C D E F# ... the maj 6th replaces the b7th.
This does have 5 patterns, but doesn't have one with the related Imaj chord as root. No Gmaj pattern.
So The mixo pattern is my reference for Melodic Min. door with Lydian b7.
Example... Chord pattern of A-7 to D7, basic II V. The Amin Dorian pattern, 1,b3, 11, 5 ,6 is basic Reference for using A melodic Min relationships, and the Dmixo pentatonic pattern, D E F# A C... is reference for D7#11 or Lydian b7 Melodic Min. relationships.
This relationship can also work with Altered chords but since The altered chord is really a Min7b5 from MM. or Harmonic min. I sometimes use a Harmonic or Melodic minor pentatonic pattern and it's variation.
The basic pattern for Amin would be... A C D E G# with the altered version of ... A B D E G#.
Again these patterns are 12 fret repeating patterns... the way to get them together is to play two octaves starting on each note and work your way up the neck, eventually becomes One big pattern.
So the A B D E G# covers the VII-7b5 chord from Amm... which is generally where Altered chords are from. It covers the E7b13 chord from Amm, the V7b13 chord, it covers E7b9b13 from A har.min. also covers The mm IV chord, D7#11.
You can create pentatonic relationships with different Target notes...
One of the most common approaches to developing solos is having a basic melodic idea, a short melodic phrase and developing that idea. So as rhythm section players... we can use Harmony as method of development. Even most single note players develop melodic ideas harmonically... they choose to think melodically, because that's what they're playing. But melodic development is generally also harmonic development. You can also create call and answer type of development... and that type of development easily works with using different types of Function to help create the motion or movement within your solo. Tension resolve, call and answer etc... there are a few types of melodic/Harmonic patterns or basic melodic formulas that work almost like templates that fit Forms to develop solos.
It's not robotic or soul less... just like you can feel and hear simple melodic and harmonic ideas... if you try, you'll hear and fell more extended ideas... eventually you'll feel extended ideas. You'll hear phrases instead on single notes.
So the point is... using CST, not as a source for scales or running scales over changes, but as a source for understanding Harmonic relationships by being aware of different possible Functional relationships of chords.... sometimes you'll play something different and realize... maybe I wasn't really hearing or playing what I thought I was. Or maybe not. Maybe you'll at least begin to understand
CST.
I can post PDF's of the basic pentatonics I use with two octaves starting on each degree with the fingerings I use... which are consistent with everything I play on Guitar, same fingering organization for all notes and chords. Unless I already have...
-
12-30-2017 09:02 PM
-
Reg,
Thanks, the terminology gets a little clearer with each reading.
-
I was thinking... maybe everyone doesn't get the simple part.
That the standard Maj/Min pentatonic pattern can have two basic references
Take Gmaj Pentatonic,
G A B D E, so that pattern can be,
1).. Major, Ionian reference, or
2) Dominant or Mixolydian reference
Gmaj Pentatonic
G.... pattern 1 with Ionian reference, Rt, 9th, 3rd, 5th and 13th ... can also be... Mixolydian reference.
A.... pattern 2 with Dorian reference, Rt, 9th, 11th, 5th, b7th........can also be ...Aeolian reference.
B.... pattern 3 with Phrygian reference, Rt, b3, 11th, b13th, b7th.....can also be ...Locrian reference.
D.... pattern 4 with Mixolydian reference, Rt, 9th, 11th, 5th, 13th..... can also be ..Dorian reference.
E.... pattern 5 with Aeolian reference, Rt, b3rd, 11th, 5th, b7th...... can also be Phrygian reference.
So the notes are the same... but with different starting references, the next step when one starts to use and create relationship, harmonic relationships which can be realized melodically... the result or possibilities are different.
From 2nd set of references... you can easily modal interchange into Melodic Minor.
Mixolydian can also be..... Lydian b7
Aeolian can also be..........Mixolydian b13
Locrian can also be ........ Locrian with natural 9th or simi. locrian
Dorian can also be Dorian with natural 7th or Melodic Minor
Phrygian can also be Phrygian natural13
These are all simple examples of using CST to have different basic tonal references which has different possibilities.
I also do the same process with G Dom. pentatonics
G, A, B, D, F... F instead of E, again different references. Great with MM. Pattern 1 becomes Lydian b7 etc...Last edited by Reg; 12-31-2017 at 01:46 PM.
-
I appreciate this.
Originally Posted by Reg
Hmmm. For a moment I thought I understood it.
Let's look at this:
"A.... pattern 2 with Dorian reference, Rt, 9th, 11th, 5th, b7th........can also be ...Aeolian reference."
This refers to playing A B D E G against, say, an Am going to D7 heading to G. Is that the sort of thing that "dorian reference" means?
Or, for example, as Aeolian, playing it against a vim heading to a IVmaj in the key of C? Is that an "aeolian reference"?
Then, when you related it to mel min, I lost you.
"Mixolydian can also be..... Lydian b7"
G Mixo? D Mixo? Either?
Is this referring to every melodic minor scale that contains G A B D E?
Is that the underlying theme? Which modes/scales contain the notes of G Pentatonic?
Maybe I'm the only one but I find it way easier when everything is related to a specific key or note, just so there's no ambiguity.
That said, I'm intrigued by what you are writing, Reg, and thanks for taking the time.Last edited by rpjazzguitar; 12-31-2017 at 07:34 PM.
-
Hey Reg. I think you've posted altered fingerings before. Maybe not the others. Originally Posted by Reg
You said 4 pentatonics?
Do you mean the following?
1 Maj/min
2 Dom/Dorian
3 MM
4 altered
Very interested, but no time to dig into this today. Slammed...
-
Somewhat over my head I'm sure, but you're basically using the ambiguity of pentatonics to open the doors to extended harmonic relationships? Originally Posted by Reg
How do you apply this? Alternate chorus with single different reference for variety? Is the ambiguity the jumping off point for more specific *8-note scales* or for just accessing "others pentatonics", like altered?
Might be cool to see some examples. Somewhat beyond me, but I'd like to at least ask while we're talking about it.
-
AFAIC it means GABDE could come from any of mentioned scales and modes, therefore you can use them accordingly.
Then switch E for F and see what set of possible scales and modes that could come from.
Of course, the trick is not to know it, but to be able to play it in meaningful maner.
-
Yea, it's that simple. But when you use more patterns, you get more choices of note changes.
When you use the basic Maj pentatonics... Lets modulate to F, last months standards tune was Hackensack or Lady... an eight bar blues in F, with a bridge... OK ... A A B A
So that could be tune to work with... simple.
So Maj. Pentastonics,
F7 the I chord....F G A C D becomes,
Bb7, IV chord.....F G Bb C D.... A going to Bb. Which makes simple Targets to imply the basic pentatonic patterns,
Now you start creating relationships, you add more changes... or more melodic patterns, (same thing)
So for The F7 chord, you can use the Relative and Parallel relationships... Dmin and Fmin.
With the relative Dmin...it's the same notes. And the trick is how you connect the two... we're playing a I7 to IV7, the basic foundation of all blues, right. So you should be hearing or thinking... Blue notes'
Blue notes for F....Primary Blue notes... b3 or Ab, b7 or Eb, secondary... #11 or b5 and notes from Cmm.
The secondary blue notes can have different sources... F7 becoming F7#9 or B7#11. F7#9 can be simple Modal interchange, of sub of B7 the sub of F7, which open the Cmm door by being relative II- of F7. The basic starting point of creating Chord Patterns, or adding more chord movement to basic changes, anyway The II V is one of the standards. So now you have all kinds of possible movement between notes or chords.... and different possibilities of how to harmonically frame the movement.
Simple version... you develop Licks that already imply what I was breaking down above. You have starting licks that set up ideas, both melodic and harmonic... that you can develop... that's what you generally do with improvisation... develop an idea or lick.
That's the basic old school method of learning, you learn to play licks that imply chord patterns, chord movement. You start with simple one chord vamps, then two, three etc. Once you learn how to play or imply harmonic movement... (basically learn most of the tunes),
you get to the point that you can start developing different versions of ideas, licks, or melodies. ( copy someone, memorize something, eventually develop your own version).
The down side of this approach... you don't really understand what your doing, you become proficient at playing memorized material. And you become somewhat vanilla because you can't really develop what you haven't played in real time. It works... that's how I started as a kid... but wanted more, could even see as a kid where it was going.
Sorry... So this same approach of framing target notes, licks, melodies... whatever you choose to play or call what your playing... works with almost anything. I tend to try and use material that has similar function, or as many connections harmonically.
Take the same changes above... F7 to Bb7 and use the Dominant Pentatonics... 1, 9, 3, 5, b7, or the minor versions
Dominant Pentatonic...F G A C Eb ... there is no real Relative Min... No D, right, but you can still force it, it's just not as easy..but
The related II- or......C Eb F G A... Dorian or MM really works well. and of course Fmin etc...
If you take the time to notate out the different Target notes from licks, which imply different chordal movement, or the melodic pattern movement... you'll start to see and understand what and why licks work. It will eliminate much of the noodle material many guitar players tend to do.
This is not voiceleading or traditional contrapuntal practice... most of what is actually used when playing jazz etc... would be wrong. Your not after least amount of movement, smooth lines etc...
I'll try and put together some vids... where I can show how I use these concepts.
-
Exactly..
It's kind of like reaching a Destination...and you decide whether you want to start on a side street to a bigger street to the Destination ...
Or even take a longer Route or an Alternate Route or Scenic Route AND once you get there you park in the Garage ..out front ...or on the side ...or the Driveway
Like the Driveway is the root , the Garage is the 6th
On the side is the 7th..
And landing on a Triad within the Destination Chord ( mini Arp ) the Major or Minor Triad ( mini arp ) within the Chord
is a stronger Melodic Cadence ..than just a chord tone but they all work...
The more "out " you go , the stronger the Cadences need to be.
The reason CST is underdeveloped and misleading is that it rarely addresses the Melodic Cadences ..so you hear People noodling and waiting for the Scale itself to have some Answer.
Or looking for the" Magic Scale " the Micro Cosmic Bebop Scale etc..
Targeting the minor part of a Major 7th Chord from a Minor Penta or Minor Scale gives a dirtier darker flavor than the Major side...etc etc..
The CST People who just throw out scales without implying a Destination are unintentionally throwing up a smokescreen which IS the scales if this has not been made clear to you .
Scales with no destination = smokescreen or Monkey swinging aimlessly in the Tree example analogy below...
This is why I always mention Melodic Cadences- as the true Common Denominator ...for all Improv. whether you are Coltrane ( All Theory Plus Instinct)
or SRV ( pure instinct but knew how to target his simpler Changes instinctively by 'ear').
Or me EDIT 1/4 between them...
A better Analogy is the Chord Tones and Extensions are like the Trunk of a Tree...you hit the Trunk ...you are at rest ..you exit off a branch and then back to the trunk ..
you can literally go way out on a limb of a limb IF you come back strong..
The branches from each tree ( each Chord ) touch the other Trees and share common and parallel Branches and they all connect eventually but some indirectly some are common......
You have Trunk Choices and Branch Choices...and Rhythm which breathes life into the whole thing.
The' Berklee Today ' Intro , posted below roughly says that the 'Student' ideally would be somewhat proficient with using mostly chord tones in their Solos before using CST ....
Sort of Disclaimer to prevent 'No Resolution Syndrome'. I get it.Last edited by Robertkoa; 01-02-2018 at 01:49 PM.
-
Ok! This one I think I understand! Originally Posted by Reg
Some people do some similar substituting (a portion of what Reg might describe as references and relationships, if I get it) with entire scales and modes. Thinking, instead, about pentatonics may open things up a bit more, since you get to consider all the scales that contain a certain group of 5 notes, I guess. I'd have to think about that more.
From a different viewpoint, it involves eliminating two notes from the usual scales and modes. For major/dominant it's the 4th and either 6 or 7. For minor, I'm not sure, exactly how that works in this system.
What I find interesting is that it's another way of finding what I call "phantom chords" because I don't know the standard terminology if there is one. It refers to playing on Chord A while the comping is on Chord B.
When something catches my ear and I transcribe it, this is often what I find. For example, a simple arpeggio -- but of a different chord than the one that's being played. A simple example would be Wes playing Bbmaj7 over Gm. A slightly more complicated example would be playing Gb7 over C7 (heading to Fmaj).
More advanced examples can get way further outside, including what might seem like random choices of triads or arps which work mainly because they eventually rejoin the COM that's in the comping.
To me, the trick is to recognize that a good outside line would be inside against a different harmony.
Doing this by exploring the harmonic relationships between one scale and another, one arp and another, or one pentatonic and another seems like a good way to create these sounds.
The one thing that I'd add is that I have found it time consuming to add even one sound to my vocabulary. This approach may be infinite. Therefore, you have to be patient and do them one at a time.
-
This is a really interesting thread.
I wonder if the OP’s opening question was triggered by this from Berklee:
Berklee Today | Berklee College of Music
Just following up on some references to Mark Levine’s excellent Jazz Theory Book, here’s what Mark says:
‘There is no single, all inclusive “jazz theory”. In fact that’s why the subject is called jazz theory rather than jazz truth. The only truth is in the music itself. “Theory” is the little intellectual dance we do around the music, attempting to come up with rules that explain why Charlie Parker and John Coltrane sounded the way they did. There are almost as many jazz theories as there are jazz musicians.’
What I really like about Mark’s book is that he uses musical phrases from the great players to illustrate his points.
Actually I would disagree with Mark to the extent that I believe there is “jazz truth”: it comprises the 7 scale tone seventh chords and arpeggios (IMaj7, IIm7, IIIm7, IVMaj7, V7, VIm7, VIIm7b5) and the major scale - ie diatonics; the diminisheds.
I wouldn’t even include the melodic minor – for me this is just what happens naturally when I outline IIm7 to bII7 to IMaj7.
Naturally you need to be able to modulate between keys too - not hard; and to have internalised the changes for some standards.
Anyone who can reasonably master the above can perform at a professional level imho.
Anyone who has gone beyond that is developing their own harmonic voice, as are Reg and many of the other great players here.
-
So you handle altered with diminished rather than mm? Originally Posted by sunnysideup
-
Hi Matt, this is a really great thread, thanks for your reply.
I'm really trying to help create some clarity as to what is required for good basic professional level playing, and how that is distinguished from what might be called "artistry".
I'm confident that what I've outlined above provides that distinction. I have a feeling that some of that clarity might have been blurred in the discussion so far (but this is not a criticism at all, I've enjoyed the discussion probably more than any theory thread I've read here, and it's really great to get an insight into how other players work, especially Reg's detailed insights, which really could be expanded on and on and on - in a good way.)
I'm saying this not to challenge the advanced players, but to give the less advanced players a clear goal as to what is needed to play at a professional level.
Re your specific question about how to treat altereds - there are different types of "altered" and different situations in which they might occur, and different ways of addressing them, and for each way of addressing them a variety of ways of analysing them, so that I don't think it would be helpful for me to provide a stock answer that can be found in a scale book.
But let me bounce that question back to you: which specific altered are you talking about, and in which specific harmonic context, and how do you and your favourite player(s) address it?
-
Yeah if it's something like E7#9 is in changes, or implied, as a minor V7 etc I use MM for arp subs like FmMaj7 and Abmaj7#5. From Joe Elliott and reg point of view for me. I know other players approach more as just a tritone sub plus diatonic or simply Bb7 plus diatonic of the moment? Anyway, I'm really a hobbyist in jazz but interested to learn whatever. Originally Posted by sunnysideup
Anyway, is Levin more apt to use dim?
-
Yea... I post lots of guitar material... we're basically a rhythm section instrument. We think in harmonic terms. Melodic material is result or realization of harmony.
Being able to perform at a professional level.... isn't saying that much. Vanilla works well as well as mud. The difference starts to develop when rhythm section players began to be able to organize the mud. Which means... Harmonically frame melodic material... with organization.
rpjazzguitar.... it's not that much. It's not infinite. Eventually it becomes a collection of common chord patterns. And you simple plug and play Harmonic applications. The plug and play part helps organize the notes that aren't spelled out. Helps frame extensions, Blue Notes, embellishments etc... BH approach is one plug and play approach, traditional functional harmony is another. But again you need to write the material out. And you do need to have the basic references to start with.
I used Pentatonics because most guitarist tend to practice them etc... I'm using them as vehicle to apply harmonic concepts.
Sunnyside... yes, I've been from that perspective for ever. But it's really... most don't understand CST. CST isn't one set of guidelines.
The dance between theory and truth.... well it's actually pretty straight ahead. Different tunes and composers have established jazz common practice. At least more than enough to be able to get past vanilla. With the established usage of modal concepts, modal interchange... and the difference between Functional harmony from Harmonic minor to Melodic minor. Long story short... it's easy to hear and see what melodic and harmonic patterns imply.
If your a rhythm section player... part of your job is to be able to hear these differences and how they effect different styles of music.
With jazz...it's not what's notated or from the basic chart, it's what we do with the music.
The music may be the truth, but part of our job is to help that truth be based on as many facts as possible. Just because one is unaware doesn't cover.
-
Hi Matt, sorry about the delay in getting back to you.
Before going into it let me just say I tend to use scale fragments, arpeggios and broken arpeggios, never full scales.
Ok, lets take the minor 2 5 1. I really think of this most of the time more correctly (imho) as VII, III7, VI, and this is how I visualize it on the fretboard.
I might run up a four note VII arpeggio from the root (that’s two beats); drop down a semitone to the 3rd of III7, and from there maybe something based on running up a diminished arpeggio (that’s two beats); home and dry. Given how quick all that happened, I didn’t have time for scales ;-)
Parker usually thought of the VII as a V (eg in C, Bm7b5 becomes G7) he might start by running a dominant arpeggio from the root G.
Pat Martino often thinks of the VII as a minor 6th (eg in C, Bm7b5 becomes Dm6) he might run up a Dm6 arpeggio from the root (he’d more likely do something Dorian, but I’m just trying to illustrate a point here).
And I’m sure you’ve seen the point I’m aiming at – these 3 arpeggios are just inversions of each other, with maybe some different colour.
The reason that I work with scale fragments and arpeggios is just for simple practical reasons – there are no other players around here for several hundred miles, so I enjoy working on song arrangements alone (I don’t like the term “chord melody”) – actually not arrangements, I wouldn’t be able to play a song the same way twice even if I wanted to – but you know what I mean. And I want to make sure the changes are clear, but not necessarily vanila.
I very rarely think in terms of scales at all. Instead I just have good (ahem) fretboard visualization for all keys and all their modes (I hate this term and I never use it) and their 7 scale tone 7th chords and arpeggios. Working this way the functional harmony is clear and it makes it very easy for me to alter chords, modulate, transpose, and it doesn’t clutter up my brain too much.
I did a huge amount of pentatonic stuff back in the 70s, as many rock style guitarists did/do. Listening to Coltrane's pentatonics was someting else though :-)
I’ve proof read this, but my head’s a bit thick this morning, so apologies if there are any glitches.
-
Sunny’s a Trane man. Dim is kind of a Trane sound
-
I would add that I haven’t really looked into a lot of Coltrane directly but the stuff I have checked out, for me, resists analysis in a way that isn’t true of Dexter or Hank on one hand or Kurt/Metheny/Lund etc etc on the other.
The nearest thing to it I’ve seen is Holdsworth.
So it’s scales etc, but material is often applied in a different way which seems to defy the usual
CST rum of things (at least for me)
What are the threads views on this? Or am I missing a logic?
-
Cool. Makes me feel little better about kinds of things I'm doing . I have way of practicing "playing through" with fragments and arpeggios. Originally Posted by sunnysideup
For me, the overall scales are the pool from which I pull out some things to shed individually and develop new vocabulary . New chord subs or arp subs etc.
-
oh Matt!
you shoudn't say you hate modes.
Sometimes,modes are a real trip in other cultures ,other manners to think about music,others mentalities!
A few Weeks ago,I was dilighted to discover the modes of the Hirashoshi scale !
You can incorporate in Your music fragments of Japanese,Persian or wathever you want by exploring the modes of foreign musics.
You should try !
cheers
HB
-
I would add that I haven’t really looked into a lot of Coltrane directly but the stuff I have checked out, for me, resists analysis in a way that isn’t true of Dexter or Hank on one hand or Kurt/Metheny/Lund etc etc on the other.
The nearest thing to it I’ve seen is Holdsworth.
So it’s scales etc, but material is often applied in a different way which seems to defy the usual
CST rum of things (at least for me)
What are the threads views on this? Or am I missing a logic?
-
Hey HP. Super long thread. Not sure which post you're referring to, but I have pretty healthy "relationship" with modes. We're not getting a place together or anything , but we don't really have any problems either. Ha! :-) Originally Posted by Hyppolyte Bergamotte
Anyway, I'm very much into alternative note sets . Maybe it was a the terminology thing?
Anyway, great see you out and about on the forum. Your post had me googling the pronunciation of your name. I'm ashamed of how badly I mispronounced mentally every time I saw it previously. :-)
-
undertanding of scales is different... and those who use CST term also seem to come from different points.. (being positive or negative about it) Originally Posted by christianm77
As I see it..
- there are scales as technical excercise - similar in classical, to practice long runs in steps. they also practics arpeggios in teh same way.
- there are scales that are modes in modal music, not just modal jazz... but different modal music (early classical, folk, modern classics - whaever)... that is muci where the relationships are built on mode structure (not on functional tonality) - it's very different... the hearing or realtions and tonic and cadences can be absolutely different... it is quite possible that we just do not hear it.
take renaissance pieces and often we will not hear cadence as the conlusion (as we hear in functional tonality).. it may sound abrupted for us... same thing in may other aspects too.. though it was not for those people and their culture
- there's also weird rock-pop guiatristic application of scales (which came i dont' where from) - some mix of educational material and its vulgar popularized application...
- and there are also different applications of scales within fucntional tonality as serious practical method of organization...
probably these two last ones are mostly the topic here?
Though for me personally the second is the most interesting... for example trane was mentioned... I do not know what he did as method.. but I definitely hear scales as specifique compositional sound in his music... it's not just application of scales to functional toality... it is different music.
the same thing I tried to explaine on teh topic about Bridge ending of Good Mornig Heartache... to me it works because it is dorian sound that works there... real dorian with its tonic and minor 3rd and maj6... and there's dorian cadence there...Last edited by Jonah; 01-03-2018 at 04:35 PM.
-
- there's also weird rock-pop guiatristic application of scales (which came i dont' where from) - some mix of educational material and its vulgar popularized application...
and this provokes questions like this
Scale in transcribe
-
Have we finally got to the point where we understand... CST is not about scales.
It's about Jazz Harmony...and Analysis of Jazz Harmony.
The scale part is just one of the tools to help understand different possibilities of Functional relationships between chords with and without relationship to a Key.
Reply With Quote
Ham Radio
Today, 05:39 PM in Everything Else