-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
10-08-2017 06:56 PM
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
BH ‘s Big complaint about modern piano players is that they seem to think that C4 Is Good enough to play in the bass.
The other thing that I found very profound in terms of what he said was, “oh, the piano player is playing Am7-D7, so bird must be playing Am7-D7. Bird was not playing Am7-D7, would be impossible for him to do. Bird was playing and thinking D7”.
Come to think of it, many modern interpretations on how to teach bebop (Eg, Sheryl bailey) pretty much focus exclusively on the dominant seventh .
Which reminds me: I was driving home with a friend of mine who is a seven string arch top player. Who has some very nice guitars. But not nearly as nice as the piano in his house. He actually learned piano first.
I was talking about “Saturday night at the Blackhawk” and he said “ that was the first jazz record he ever bought“. ( imagine having a general conversation about Friday and Saturday night at the Blackhawk everybody knows exactly what that means. )
I said, “I know this is going to sound blasphemous, but I kept thinking, thanks Miles, now get the fuck off the stage so Wyton Kelly can take his chorus “.
he said, ‘ ah, Wyton Kelly there was a real master. He kept playing the dominant seventh chord and kept playing the dominant seventh chord and dominant seventh chord upon after dominant seventh chord“.
We agreed as to the following reasons as to why: movement, flow, blues and bebop.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
But I learned how to play jazz from a 70 year old piano player who loved Erroll Garner. And sometimes he talked about scales, never church mode names, but yeah, scales.
I never knew about CST or that people argued about it until I started joining Internet forums.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
I was afraid of him. I had no choice. If I played too hip for my britches he'd BURN my sorry ass.
And of course, the other thing was simply not knowing there was another way. Ignorance can be bliss. And damn helpful for focus.Last edited by mr. beaumont; 10-08-2017 at 07:11 PM.
-
Originally Posted by NSJ
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
"Chord Scale Theory is the opposite of ...? " , OK, I'll take a wild guess, is it ... Pumpkin? ...
-
Originally Posted by NSJ
Again compare and contrast to actual 40s and 50s piano playing.
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Riight. exactly. He feels that the piano player needs to be there with the bass player. It was in that hour long master class in Spain that’s on YouTube.
EDIT about 3 1/2 minutes in:Last edited by NSJ; 10-09-2017 at 09:29 AM.
-
I think it's pretty much opposite of playing by ear. But, somehow, it isn't the only thing opposite.
My take on it is this. Even when I know exactly what scales/modes/arps are being used in a solo I like on a recording, when I play eactly the same scales/modes/arps, I don't sound as good as the solo. In fact, not even close. The difference is partly in the quality of the melody and partly in the articulation of the notes and, substantially, in the time feel.
So, I figure, there are a bunch of skills that like prerequisites for getting what CST may have to offer.
You have to be able to make up good melodies.
You have to be able to find the notes on the instrument and execute them well with tone and articulation.
You have to have great time.
At that point, you can begin to use CST to find alternate harmonic expression. But, you still have to internalize the sounds and be able to make melody with them.
I think its easier to learn more theory than to deal with the basics of imagination and expression. So, it becomes an attractive nuisance.
I'm trying to plan my practice time accordingly.
-
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.
-
Originally Posted by Reg
All the best, to you. I always enjoy your posts. They opened my eyes in many ways regarding Jazz and guitar playing.Last edited by Vladan; 10-10-2017 at 10:20 AM.
-
I mean if you really dig what Reg is saying...if you really know your chords, inversions, basic scales (major and the minors, the common modes, whether you know 'em as modes or alterations of another scale) none of the other stuff matters as much. Chords aren't a mystery, there's only 12 notes that repeat on the neck. Knowing the instrument and having an ear you can trust can get you far without a lick of "theory." And it demystifies theory when you see it.
Time for me to go practice all the stuff I think I can do (but probably can't)
-
Yeah, you have to know your basic materials. There’s a tremendous amount of work to be done just on that.
-
Originally Posted by Vladan
-
Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
I do find that almost always when I don't "get" something, I can trace it back to a fundamental thing I haven't spent enough time on.
Fundamentals answer a whole lot of questions...
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
I said I agree with Reg and all that, basically I agree with you ... , so what's the deal?
My post meant that for my self and my own purpose, the time I spend babbling theory and armchair philosophy on guitar forum is the time spent the best way possible. I wish I could do all the things Reg think should be done. I can see from your responses, some have already mastered that basic part, some are mastering it as it comes, some are keen on and confident they will ... Unfortunately for me, I'm not that gifted, talented, determined, persistent ... I own a guitar for some 36 years already and still can not nail major scale. I'm kind of Steve Vai type, who said that while music was always easy to him, guitar was not and he thinks anybody who would spend as much time on guitar as he have, would achieve much more in guitar playing domain. Only music is not easy to me, either. it's even harder than guitar.
So, again, if my goal was to play guitar I'd better practice inversions and all that. However, If my goal is what it is, I'm just as good writing on a forum. In that sense, the sheer number of my on topic posts in this thread is revealing.Last edited by Vladan; 10-10-2017 at 11:49 AM.
-
I didn't respond to disagree...
-
That's why you got "?".
-
Originally Posted by Vladan
-
Mat, I do agree on shortcuts, but I think, what you are trying to say is not how I feel and does not correspond with what I think I have said. This is kind of pointless discussion. You can not know my thoughts and feelings, just like Reg can not know what motivates some people who can not play, and some people who can, to bitch over CST and useless theory. That is all.
Further dialing in the Ibanez AF95 ... I do like...
Today, 05:44 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos