Wave analysis using Mark Levine's method

[rpjazzguitar]

Thanks again for another thoughtful reply.

So, if I understand you, "minor dominant" means all the various minor scales all packed into one Master Scale.

And, it looks like that turns out to be 10 notes -- with the 4 and nat 7 being left out. That makes sense, because the 4 will make it sound like the iim not the V7 and the nat7 will conflict with the b7.

Do I have this right?

Is it really the same thing as saying, "play any note but be very careful with the nat7 and somewhat careful with the 4?"

<The #11 is rarely used as a harmonic sound, but it does happen>

I thought they played #11 a lot ... so I guess I don't understand this.

<(TBH I suspect players of the bop era where thinking minor on dominant, because they look to me like they are playing VI minor lines on II7 chords.)>

Warren Nunes, who was a great bop player, taught it this way. He said that there were only two types of chords "one type and two type". "One type" referred to Imaj IIIm Vmaj7 VIm. "Two type" referred to IIm, IIIm, V7, VIm (double duty for VI) and VIIm7b5. He used them interchangeably within the two groups.

He also taught that there were 5 sounds, basically, iirc, Major, Aeolian, Melodic Min, Diminished and WT. He did not, as I recall it, teach harmonic minor. I don't recall him explaining how many chord types there were, say, within Melodic Minor, although Levine says it's one type only.

[ragman1]

Major Scale
Melodic Minor Scale
Diminished Scale
Whole Tone Scale

All right if I come in on this?

I have to say, musically speaking, this selection worries me a little. Whole tone and diminished apart (and it doesn't differentiate between the half-whole and whole-half diminished scales) what do you do with minor keys?

I've played a lot of tunes in minor keys and I can promise you using only the melodic minor doesn't work. The notes are wrong, simple as that. There is the idea, which I've also exploited quite a lot (as in Blue In Green), of using the major scale in place of the harmonic minor - i.e. over Bm7b5/E7b9 play C major. It works, up to a point, but not always.

So how is this 4-scale idea supposed to work? I don't see it, I confess.

[rpjazzguitar]

All right if I come in on this?

I have to say, musically speaking, this selection worries me a little. Whole tone and diminished apart (and it doesn't differentiate between the half-whole and whole-half diminished scales) what do you do with minor keys?

I've played a lot of tunes in minor keys and I can promise you using only the melodic minor doesn't work. The notes are wrong, simple as that. There is the idea, which I've also exploited quite a lot (as in Blue In Green), of using the major scale in place of the harmonic minor - i.e. over Bm7b5/E7b9 play C major. It works, up to a point, but not always.

So how is this 4-scale idea supposed to work? I don't see it, I confess.

Honestly, I never understood how he approached anything but the Major and Aeolian. But, as far as I can recall, I'm quoting him correctly.

If I was forced to guess, I'd suggest that he had worked out the major and aeolian material in way that worked and made theoretical sense. He really played what he talked about. With the rest, I'm not sure. It may be that he didn't play those sounds much, but considered them part of jazz. But, I'll say this -- I heard him play for a period of time totaling hours, probably, and I don't recall ever hearing him hit a bad note.

[ragman1]

I heard him play for a period of time totalling hours, probably, and I don't recall ever hearing him hit a bad note.

Levine we're talking about, right? Okay, I submit :-)

[matt.guitarteacher]

The practice of prioritizing major, and then melodic minor goes back to at least William Leavitt. So, it's not anything really modern or new. Major assumes you're covering natural minor, right? Melodic minor isn't functional, and isn't ever really used that way. You don't simply play E melodic minor for the key of E minor, but you can use melodic minor to target nearly any standard functional chord In major or minor.

For an A minor chord, you can target it with A melodic minor or E altered as pretty standard, vanilla approaches. There are many others as well. They provide basic neighbor tones and chromatics for enclosures etc.

It doesn't matter whether you call these approaches "outside chromatic tones which sound good against A minor" or think of them as being from a specific "scale", you're very often playing the same notes and people simply argue about the thought process. But Regardless of what anybody actually calls anything, it isn't the same as simply playing the notes of one variety of minor scale over an entire progression. The diminished scale, likewise, very much has the feel of a type of "enclosure scale" to me.

Very vanilla MM approach would be to sub MM for minor chords, Lydian dominant or altered for dominant chords, Lydian sharp five for major chord types, and Locrian#2 for m7b5. These are pretty easy to hear, beginner melodic minor subs, especially subbing equivalent MM arps. Not including the most standard sub - altered, you're basically playing straight diatonic and adding one chromatic lower neighbor to one chord degree for each.

Again, that's pretty vanilla , and that's the thing maybe confusing to many . When you look at it or listen to it, it may not look like some drastic melodic minor thing. These guys don't just play straight up one octave scales when they're soloing. Using portions of the diminished scale, you can get pretty classic jazz sounds, without sounding really "out there".

It's a thought process more than anything. If you think you're not really hearing any melodic minor or diminished etc, are you hearing ANY chromatics? The player may be using some of these frameworks in their thought process for playing them, but the result may merely sound like "chromatic notes which sound good".

[christianm77]

This is all coming out a lot more confusing then it actually is.

I'll try a different tack. We have a minor scale. A minor scale has a 6th and a 7th that can be moved around according to melodic direction and harmonic climate.

Now, when I use the confusing term 'minor dominant' all I mean is the VERY VERY OBVIOUS idea of looking at a minor scale on I working over a dominant chord, on V.

So the classic example is when we use a V7 chord in a minor key, we need to raise the b7th by a half step to make the V chord into a major. This is basic music theory right?

So basically what I am saying is that when improvisers of the older generation (Bird, Burrell, Dexter, Grant Green etc etc) came across a minor ii-V-I they were likely to play a minor scale on I over it. This minor scale could have both b7 and 7s in the same melodic line depending on what works best as a melody.

Now often when played on a V7 chord, this minor key melody would pick out notes of the I minor scale that would bring out the sound of the scale, such as the 7, 9, 4 and b6, and then resolve into the chord tones of the I chord 1 b3 5.

I suspect that in Levine's estimation this concept is so basic it needs no introduction, and yet I see it again in solo after solo as the basic way of playing a minor ii-V, or ii-V-I.

I hope that makes more sense. Basically you have the major and minor scales and you use them to generate functional harmony?

[rpjazzguitar]

I was talking about Warren Nunes.

I heard Mark Levine once live, some years back. Can't recall a clam from him either. But, at his level, if he hit one, he'd make it right with the next couple of notes.

[rpjazzguitar]

Third time was the charm. Thanks for being patient. I get what you're saying now.

[Hep To The Jive]

Sometimes I find would be nice to be able to play in key, and clam-free (I wish ), without making the changes "very clear". For this I would try the "change as few notes as possible" method:

DMa7 - D major
Bbdim - B harmonic minor or D harmonic major
Am7 - G major
D7b9 - G harmonic major
GMa7 - D major
Gm6 - D harmonic major, etc.

You can get pretty far only changing one note at a time.

I understand that, and I'm sure I borrow notes from those scales as I navigate through the changes, but I don't think of the scales, that's the difference. I don't practice the scales unless as technical drills, even though I can play most of them on demand, because I used to practice them a lot in the past.

I differentiate the tunes though, some are much better suited for CST. I played Cantaloupe Island the other day, and naturally I switched to more scale/mode approach, but standards like Wave, why?

Maybe someone can write down an example, besides the analyzes, which is only shows a scale in each measure for each chord, but an actual solo? A creative way to apply?

[rintincop]

How about Giant Steps without chord scale associations?

[Hep To The Jive]

How about Giant Steps without chord scale associations?

If you are asking me, no idea. Never touched this tune. What does it have to do with Wave?

[ragman1]

I was talking about Warren Nunes.

I heard Mark Levine once live, some years back. Can't recall a clam from him either. But, at his level, if he hit one, he'd make it right with the next couple of notes.

Right. Sorry, the connection wasn't clear. Of course what we ought to do is take that clip and analyse what he's doing. Takes more time than I've got though

[ragman1]

Maybe someone can write down an example, besides the analyzes, which is only shows a scale in each measure for each chord, but an actual solo? A creative way to apply?

I could do that but the trouble is that when you lock yourself into a pre-set pattern it stifles your playing and usually sounds wrong, strained, whatever. So I tend not to do it although there are exceptions. Mind needs to be free to be creative!*

* which doesn't mean you play all over the place and call it creative :-)

(edit)

Changed my mind, only takes a moment. Try this. Hope you don't mind if I don't notate it out for you, that would be a bit much

[christianm77]

How about Giant Steps without chord scale associations?

There's about a squillion ways to get through Giant Steps. Some are CST based, many are not.

It's at its core a collection of V-I's and ii-V-I's in three keys. Nothing terribly CST inherently about that.

[christianm77]

That said, nothing inherently CST about Jobim either. I doubt he knew what any of this stuff was TBH. Jobim harmony is patterned after stuff like Romantic and Impressionist harmony, Choro and I am told a bit of Barney Kessel in the voicings.

CST is something we put on it afterwards.

Actual CST based 'tunes' tend to be written by jazz musicians who have some CST background - which these days is most of them - but you could hold up Wayne Shorter as an example.

[rintincop]

The solos that John Coltrane played on his various takes of "Giant Steps" relied on a few simple improvisation techniques:
The common scales associated with the chords
The common chord arpeggios associated with the chords
And just a few cases of simple melodic fragments based on melodic embellishment of the chord/scale tones.

He also repeatedly recycled his favorite 4 note motif: "1235" (and also in descending form 5321) McCoy Tyner also favors that motif.

Each time Coltrane recorded the tune his solo was remarkably similar: scales, arps, short melodic phrases, and his favorite 4 note motif (1235). He repeated certain lengthy phrases verbatim. It's pretty obvious he had practiced the scales and arpeggios of every chord to a great extent so that he could play it so fast and smooth. The same can be said of the majority of solos throughout jazz (scales, arps, and melodic weave).

[rintincop]

Maybe some of you might try an exercise that will change scale playing into music. Mark Levine's "continuous scale exercise" in eighth notes could help.... The important thing is being able to link the scales together. It trains you to enter each new scale on the note right after the last note of the previous chord. wherever the last chord dropped you off, rather than jumping back to the root, which is too easy. You will get experience in creating long flowing lines. Practicing this exercise also equalizes the importance of each note note in every scale, and helps you get rid of thinking of the scale form the root. Rememeber your gioal is to internalize scales as an available pool of notes, to be played in any order (shape).
It requires patience because it takes a while (weeks, months) before you can make it sound great and well phrased. Mike Stern is pretty good at it... You are allowed to hit an occasional "wrong" note as that's of course always par for the course when improvising, the "wrong" notes just sound like passing tones (good notes). You should also work on how to make stops and starts along the way in "continuous scale exercise" so that the scale playing phrasing becomes more musical...

Masters of connecting scales: John Coltrane, Freddie Hubbard, Joe Henderson, Herbie Hancock, Dave Liebman, Michael Brecker, Bobby Hutcherson, Gary Burton, and many more.

[rintincop]

When I study Coltrane's solos on Giant Steps, Countdown, Moment's Notice etc. I see how often he employs that 4 note cell, alternated with arpeggios (either simple triad or 1357 types), and scale runs, scales which usually target into some chord tone of the next chord change.
When I studyMcCoy Tyners's "Fly Like The Wind" solo I see the familiar Coltrane style 4 note motif in abundance, typically 1235 or 5321 on some various starting notes (most often in root positions).

[christianm77]

Oh BTW,

Another thing that comes to mind re the crucial difference between bebop and CST use of scales is this.

In the bebop understanding, we are interested in picking out notes that are essentially harmonic in a scale and using them to outline a chord, and having notes that are just passing tones. Take the classic bebop scales for instance:

Major: C B A Ab G F E D C
Dominant:G F# F E D C B A G

One outlines C6 and the other G7, although both scales are based on the notes of C major with one added note. Students of Barry Harris will know this approach can become very sophisticated.

So there is an understanding that some notes in the scale are harmonic and others are just filler. You do get extensions and so on, but a scale isn't seen as a set of notes to be used more or less at random.

CST differs in that every note of the scale has a harmonic function - a set of good sounding notes over the chord. The 'avoid note' is of course a tone that is really a passing tone. (4 on major, b6 on minor, and Levine says 4 on dominant, although I think this is a stretch.)

Because of this we can put the notes of a chord scale with no avoid notes in any order we like over a chord. We can't do that with regular scales like major and natural/harmonic minor, but it works very well with lydian, dorian and melodic minor modes. A lot of contemporary jazz stuff is based on this concept.

Some improvisers like to combine approaches.

[Hep To The Jive]

I could do that but the trouble is that when you lock yourself into a pre-set pattern it stifles your playing and usually sounds wrong, strained, whatever. So I tend not to do it although there are exceptions. Mind needs to be free to be creative!*

* which doesn't mean you play all over the place and call it creative :-)

(edit)

Changed my mind, only takes a moment. Try this. Hope you don't mind if I don't notate it out for you, that would be a bit much

Cool, I can see the scales movement, and it fits the chords nicely indeed. For my taste though, hitting the chord tones and take the lines from there creates more interest, because naturally you'd tend to play more arpeggios than scales that way. You can hear the harmony more clear in a solo, especially if it's unaccompanied.

What I like, on dominant 7 chords hit all those altered 5,9,13, and by doing that basically get all the notes from altered scales without thinking of any. It just so much easier IMO. But then of course, I'm a one who avoid practicing scales, so it's naturally easier for me to work it that way.

[Hep To The Jive]

I could do it, but if you don't like what I come up with, you may believe it is the approach that is faulty rather than my own musical short-comings. .

I wouldn't think that way

[ragman1]

How do yous guys see the
Bdim in measure 2 ?

Edit ...Ooops that should be Bbdim sorry

I see it as A7 (or Em7b5 A7alt)

I mean functionally ...?

That's the thing with diminished chords, are they rootless 7b9s or just connecting chords? Mostly I find they tend to follow a bass line - i.e. in Wave - D - Bb - A - D - G etc.

I mean, if a player wanted to cheat they could just treat those chords as two tonal centres (D - A7) - (Am - D7 - G) and it would work fine! But, of course, being the sophisticated jazz players we are, it's the Bb whole-half.

So I'd say, functionally, the Bbo is a dim chord because of the melody - but it might have started life as an A7, who knows?

[rintincop]

Man you cat's need to get with it, jazz has moved on. It's not the 1940's anymore...traditional bebop is long past Scale playing gave a new way to play long flowing lines that are more modern in style. Think Bill Evans, Joe Henderson, John Coltrane, Freddie Hubbard, etc. These horn players and pianists became more innovative than the jazz guitar players of their time. They achieved a lot of their "modernism" by playing long flowing lines that don't worry every little chord tone, of course they know their chord tones too (it's like the ABC's real basic stuff). It's a freedom but it still "plays the changes".

[Hep To The Jive]

Man you cat's need to get with it, jazz has moved on. It's not the 1940's anymore...traditional bebop is long past Scale playing gave a new way to play long flowing lines that are more modern in style. Think Bill Evans, Joe Henderson, John Coltrane, Freddie Hubbard, etc. These horn players and pianists became more innovative than the jazz guitar players of their time. They achieved a lot of their "modernism" by playing long flowing lines that don't worry every little chord tone, of course they know their chord tones too (it's like the ABC's real basic stuff). It's a freedom but it still "plays the changes".

Haha, who cares! The cats you mentioned dont influence me much anyway.

But I do like Wave, play this tune on my gigs and love it( in case you you're wondering why im hanging on this thread)

[Vladan]

... of course, being the sophisticated jazz players we are, it's the Bb half-whole ...

... jazz has moved on ...

I think that is exactly the reasoning behind "... jazz musicians rarely play harmonic minor ...".