Wave analysis using Mark Levine's method

[pingu]

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

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?

Yeah ! Who knows ?

Did you mean Bb whole-half ? , I hope so or I've been
doing this thing wrong for ages !
Thanks Ragman

[pingu]

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.

Yeah right , apparently its the 60's !

;0)

[ragman1]

Yeah ! Who knows ?

Did you mean Bb whole-half ? , I hope so or I've been
doing this thing wrong for ages !
Thanks Ragman

Whoops, you're right. I'll have to edit that post! Thanks.

[rintincop]

Marke Levine's Theory is 1960's based. Let's make that clear. The comments I've read here are from regular forumites that seem to use this topic to polemicize, sort of ignoring the topic of this thread. It's seems as if some posters have closed their minds and want to ignore the strides innovators made in the evolution of jazz in the 1960's, such as John Coltrane, Bill Evans, Miles Davis, Wayne Shorter, Herbie Hancock, etc.

[christianm77]

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.

Try telling that to some of the young musicians I know. Some of them are really disinterested in anything after the bop era. They all did CST at college, but they question it's relevance to the music they want to make.

As for me, I'm more eclectic. I do play more modern stuff... I am currently practicing a lot of CST stuff too...

In fact I started out with CST, but became more interested in traditional approaches later on. There's an awful lot of freedom in bop - it's more that this freedom is rhythmic freedom refracted through the chord changes using scales, chord tones, enclosures etc.

I like having a solid grasp on the tradition though, learning where everything came from. Bill Evans would have been no place without Bud Powell, for example.

I also feel that CST works really well in jazz when it is informed by bebop. It's a way of getting past the stereotypical rhythmically flaccid lines that CST can allow when not informed by an intuitive grasp of jazz phrasing. But that is not CST's fault of course - but it is something I feel can be informed by transcribing and playing - perhaps not even analysing - bebop lines.

No one has to learn bop, of course. One of my favourite guitarists, Julian Lage uses little bop language, although he does seem to have a strong interest in pre-bop jazz.

TBH harmony is the last thing I think about when adapting my style from pre-bop or post-bop. Touch and feel is the main thing. I think the lines I play adapt too - but even CST stuff can sound cool in swing if played the right way.

Django and Adam Rogers both play a mess of chord tones. What makes them sound like them? Not their pitch choices.

[rintincop]

Guys, it's not an either or case. I don't see the point of posting here again. The climate is too conservative and off topic (continuous pivoting away from the top of the thread's title which was "Wave" analysis using Mark Levine's method).

[Hep To The Jive]

Guys, it's not an either or case. I don't see the point of posting here again. The climate is too conservative and off topic (continuous pivoting away from the top of the thread's title which was "Wave" analysis using Mark Levine's method).

I'm confused. Your are the OP, and your first post provided the analyzes already. Where do you wanna go from there?

The Barry Harris thread about the same tune was already making... waves (haha) before yours, so I guess you can theorize about it only so much until the whole thing seem like a joke?

Personally I'd love to hear how do you yourself approach this tune based on the scales you provided, because frankly, anyone can write down scales, it don't mean much to me. I analyze music with my ears first, in general. I mean, if you are trying to convert us old timers to the modern sound of the 60's

[2bornot2bop]

Mark Levine? Oh what do those piano guys know about havin' fun!

[matt.guitarteacher]

The OP was originally just the question. He edited it later, I imagine because some were assuming it was a joke. A little confusion at the start but nobody's fault.

[Vladan]

I used only the first 12 bars, not Levine type analysis, but not BH either, oscilloscope is probably the best guess ...

[elsee]

DMaj7
Bbo7,Passing Chord Approach to Am7
Am7,ii V I of GMaj7
D7b9,ii V I of GMaj7
GMaj7
Gm6,Modal Interchange G minor melodic
F#13 F#7(5) , Displacement
F#m7 B7b9,ii V Of E
E9
Bb7 A7,Tritone sub ii V

then,Bridge
Gm7 C9/Bb ,ii V of F
Am7,Tonic Sub

Can anyone explain me the use of this chord progression?
Bb9sus
Bb9/Ab
Gm7
Approach Sus?