-
Chord/scale associations per the Levine book.
| D ionian | Bb diminished whole-half | A dorian | D7 diminished half-whole |
| G ionian | G melodic minor | F#7 altered | B altered |
| E lydian dominant | A altered | D dorian | % |Last edited by rintincop; 02-05-2017 at 12:58 PM.
-
02-03-2017 04:45 PM
-
Boooooooo!!!!
Hahahahahaha
-
Why not choose the exact chord progression, first?
Last edited by MarkRhodes; 02-03-2017 at 05:48 PM. Reason: copyright infringement
-
Why everyone all of sudden wants to analyze Wave? It's a no-brainer tune, use the chord tones to come up with melodic lines. The scale approach doesn't really work here, the chords are changing too fast, at least in the A section. It's a pretty mellow tune, not exactly a vehicle for burning solos IMO. I usually resort to octaves, serves the mood. Maybe there's more to this tune that I ever knew? Never inspired me for harmonic exploration TBH
But not to be negative no more, carry on, I'll be tuning in with interest!
-
I thought it was a joke.
Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
Why everyone all of sudden wants to analyze Wave? It's a no-brainer tune, use the chord tones to come up with melodic lines. The scale approach doesn't really work here, the chords are changing too fast, at least in the A section. It's a pretty mellow tune, not exactly a vehicle for burning solos IMO. I usually resort to octaves, serves the mood. Maybe there's more to this tune that I ever knew? Never inspired me for harmonic exploration TBH
But not to be negative no more, carry on, I'll be tuning in with interest!
-
aha! i should've guess... but i've been out of the loop. Originally Posted by destinytot
-
I don't understand why anyone says the chords are moving too fast for a chord/scale approach - that's the only way I've ever played it. Another thing I don't get in general, not just this specific thread, but it seems that everyone is always looking for a "cheat" that lets them play one scale over a section instead of buckling down and specifically addressing each chord. Am I off base here?
-
Nope. And it doesn't necessarily have to be one thing per chord either. Originally Posted by 4thstuning
-
Well some people look for a shortcut to developing jazz language that involves playing scales over different chords* ;-) Originally Posted by 4thstuning
But I'm not all smug bebop douchebaggery. I enjoy a intervallic CST line as much as the next jazz tosser, and CST works just dandy on this tune provided you don't worry too much about micromanaging the extensions on the dominant chords.
TBH CST can be made to work on everything with a degree of intelligence and musicality.
*I am aware this is not without irony BH fansLast edited by christianm77; 02-03-2017 at 07:27 PM.
-
I saw the analyses of Wave from the other thread from Barry Harris perspective, and there was no difference from CST at all! Exactly the same thing I did on the Berklee course. Sometimes it's just seems like a theory nerds conspiracy to keep thing as complicated as possible, I swear!
-
Playing scales on the guitar as the main approach for soloing wore me down a while ago. Playing scales over every chord bores me even more. You can do it of course, but I for one wouldn't be listening much. Originally Posted by 4thstuning
-
How would you know if someone was using CST? ...or chord tones? Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
-
No it's not. But there are some similarities. Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
I saw the analyses of Wave from the other thread from Barry Harris perspective, and there was no difference from CST at all! Exactly the same thing I did on the Berklee course. Sometimes it's just seems like a theory nerds conspiracy to keep thing as complicated as possible, I swear!
-
Well, it's usually pretty apparent in the shape of people's lines, which you end up being able to hear. A lot of contemporary players flip back and forth between bop influenced lines and CST intervallic patterns for instance -it's really obvious to my ears. Originally Posted by 4thstuning
-
I find it a little incredulous that you can listen to someone's playing and know what they were thinking. Maybe you can and I should be asking you what some of my favorite players are doing. Originally Posted by christianm77
My only purpose in commenting on this thread was to reply to another comment that the chords in "Wave" flew by too fast for a CST approach, demonstrably false IMO, and second, to question why people seem to avoid buckling down and learning to play the chord (CST, chord tones, whatever). I ask because I think that is a fundamental skill that too many try to avoid.
In another thread, the question was posed what does a guitarist play when asked to perform solo, a very good question. Similarly I ask "can a player of any instrument outline the harmony for an audience in their single line solo." That is, if one was asked to play a single line solo over "Wave" changes for example with no accompaniment, would the listener hear the underlying harmony go by? My experience is that most can't do this because they can't play or acknowledge the chord in their solos. This is not to say that is the only way to play, but rather it's a necessary skill that separates good players from meandering and boring players.
I realize that I've derailed the thread with something akin to the old vertical vs horizontal debates, so my apologies - but this is an open forum and these things happen
-
When I play Wave, even by myself, you can hear the harmony, because I play a lot of 3rds and 7ths.
But, when a better player takes a solo, I think we're less likely to hear a lot of 3rds and 7ths, because the more advanced player is focusing more on chord extensions and note choices that aren't as obvious.
Oh, and one other point. Joe Pass recorded Wave on an album called Tudo Bem (roughly, All Good, in Portuguese). Joe had the melody go by quite slowly, but he put the rhythm section in double time feel throughout. So, you get fast samba with slow chord movement. Grooved like mad.
-
Who are your favourite players? Let's have a go! Originally Posted by 4thstuning
To show why this is really not an absurd claim - I'll break it down into two chunks. The first, what I think of as ear training in a general way is probably not what you are responding to, but I'll talk about it anyway.
There is a feedback loop where you trascribe music and feed it back into your theory knowledge and audiation. The more you do this, the more you start to recognise things on records. Formal ear training seems to help too. I have noticed that I hear more in music than I did a year ago, 5 years, 10 years.
For example, you transcribe a bit of a solo painstakingly, and notice that there are lots of ideas based on fourths in the mode. You then you shed stuff like that for a while. Then, you start hearing that sort of thing everywhere - it just jumps out at you. You might not have the focused ear training to be able to write the notes down right away or even play them exactly on the guitar, but you know the logic of the line.
Obvious right, I assume most intermediate to advanced players have experienced this sort of thing?
Therefore, the more different things you do the more sounds you are able to recognise the logic of in general way. This counts for everything - harmony, rhythm, lines, orchestration, anything you can think of.
The more stuff you transcribe, the faster your ears get. That by the way is point of transcription for me at the moment. Not to play solos note for note with the record or even to extract cool licks (I've done both of these things and profited by them BTW) but actually to sharpen my ear and get it faster so I can hear what's going on in music better in real time.
As to what musicians are thinking? Well when they perform, it's impossible to know! Quite often probably not anything to do with music theory. But, on the other hand you can get an idea of the stuff they have worked on in the practice room, and what sort of thinking they hav done there, which is good, because that's the place to do our thinking. (Not on stage, right?)
In the case of modern players, most have had contact with modern jazz education so you can assume they know this stuff. Not everyone uses everything. And of course many do masterclass videos now so you actually get an idea of how they think.
In terms of pre-modal era players - harder to know, but in general the harmonic palette is smaller - major and minor keys, chord tones, chromatic neighbours, passing tones, blue notes, and so on. I think it's fair to say a lot of this earlier material is basically derived from the furniture of Western music, either learned through cultural osmosis or in some cases through classical music lessons. Coleman Hawkins and Fats Waller were serious students of classical music, for instance.
So, in conclusion, I can hear when Kurt is doing a intervallic randomised modal thing because 1) I've trasncribed a solo of his and came across that sound, puzzling it out note by note, 2) I practice that shit and 3) I can therefore hear the sense of that type of line when I hear it and 4) I know he does it, he talks about it in masterclasses
Who's doing that? Slap them on the wrists and tell them to knuckle down whoever they are. I like to start with 1 3 5 and build from there. Always a great thing to practice on a tune you can't quite get under your fingers and in your ears. Back to basics...My only purpose in commenting on this thread was to reply to another comment that the chords in "Wave" flew by too fast for a CST approach, demonstrably false IMO, and second, to question why people seem to avoid buckling down and learning to play the chord (CST, chord tones, whatever). I ask because I think that is a fundamental skill that too many try to avoid.
No disagreement there. I only practice with backing tracks because I want to test something out - normally a rhythmic thing. In general I practice with a metronome, or nothing. I think Band in a Box is a harmful thing when people always play with it.In another thread, the question was posed what does a guitarist play when asked to perform solo, a very good question. Similarly I ask "can a player of any instrument outline the harmony for an audience in their single line solo." That is, if one was asked to play a single line solo over "Wave" changes for example with no accompaniment, would the listener hear the underlying harmony go by? My experience is that most can't do this because they can't play or acknowledge the chord in their solos. This is not to say that is the only way to play, but rather it's a necessary skill that separates good players from meandering and boring players.
Nah it's cool.I realize that I've derailed the thread with something akin to the old vertical vs horizontal debates, so my apologies - but this is an open forum and these things happen
Last edited by christianm77; 02-03-2017 at 10:10 PM.
-
Yes, those are important tones, but the fifth and the root are equally indicative. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
That may be true in a group setting, but it's dependent on the vision of the player. I was referring earlier to soloing unaccompanied while simultaneously suggesting the underlying harmony. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Here's what Pat Metheny thinks, pick one:
pat metheny on chord tones - Google Search
Cool. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
One time a guy said "hey, I dug those lydian dominant licks you were using" and to make him feel extra small, I said "huh? You mean that 13(#11) arpeggio?"
-
Yeah i'm really into triads as a basis - 1 3 5 - and building up from there with superpositions, added notes etc. That comes to me from Lage Lund's teaching, but a lot of Parker is just on the triads, for instance. And of course we have Bach etc. Originally Posted by 4thstuning
Metheny sounds heavy on the triads to me.
-
Outlining triads is just 4 notes away from CST. My only point is that it's important to be able to address/acknowledge the underlying chord, whatever conceptual framework is employed. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
If using triads, aded notes ... gives you X number of different ways to come to a certain choice of notes, CST will give you Y number of different ways to come to that same choice of notes, where always is
Y>X, or you could say
X is a subset of Y.
Sent from VladanMovies @ YouTube
-
The late Almir Chediak put lot of care and painstaking work into his Songbooks. Don't like these changes for the bridge of Wave , though.
-
What's the difference then, exactly? Here's Barry's, lifted from the other thread: Originally Posted by christianm77
Oh, while we at it, why is it called C dom, when it's Mixolydian? And also I would think it has to have Bb instead of B, in any case, over Gm6 ??
Last edited by Hep To The Jive; 02-04-2017 at 04:39 AM.
-
Sure. That's a nice way of looking at it actually. Originally Posted by 4thstuning
In terms of the connection to CST, I would differ on what notes I would tend to use on minor dominants for instance, and I tend to avoid #11's on major chords in certain styles of jazz (bop, swing etc), but this is more a style thing.
Also a principle difference is how many of those CST notes you use - how much you extend the harmony. Using all seven notes in a non tertial way is one example. I see this primarily as a stylistic thing again.
Lastly why seven notes on each chord? There's no compelling reason why there should be 7 available 'good sounding notes' over each chord. The constraints are the laws of acoustics not a seven note scale.
Reply With Quote
New LEDs Day
Today, 07:28 PM in Other Styles / Instruments