The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 83
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    Jeez, he said LIVE...Y'all writing charts?

    "Quick, get me 6 cocktail napkins! Sheila, tell that story about when you met Victor Young and thought he was the guy who wrote Les Miserables!"
    Well I could just say 'do it in you head' - but that doesn't help walk him through the process does it?

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Just to clarify. This is TRANSPOSING we're talking. NOT TRANSCRIBING. So we're looking for a frame of reference that allows for instantly taking a tune played to be heard and played by ear in real time on the fly with an arbitrary key center. Just so we're clear.
    I played a duo with a vocalist. She"d call a tune, find her range and start singing, or hum a few bars and I'd make an intro. Great training in transposing. Not easy at first for sure!

    David

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Well I could just say 'do it in you head' - but that doesn't help walk him through the process does it?
    I'm just being a smart ass, but seriously, there's gonna be times when you haven't worked out romannumerals for a tune and some singer needs it in Gb...so like I said--figure out the I''s and V''s and grab your ankles...

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    I'm just being a smart ass, but seriously, there's gonna be times when you haven't worked out romannumerals for a tune and some singer needs it in Gb...so like I said--figure out the I''s and V''s and grab your ankles...
    I just kind of think of everything as numerals now.

  6. #30
    I hate roman numerals. Here's why:
    VII-IV-III-V-VI-II-IV-VII - awful to read
    7-6-3-5-6-2-4-7 - much nicer.

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by emanresu
    I hate roman numerals. Here's why:
    VII-IV-III-V-VI-II-IV-VII - awful to read
    7-6-3-5-6-2-4-7 - much nicer.
    Sure. It's the convention tho. I think I think in numbers.

  8. #32
    I came up with the most horrible idea about the matter now.

    What if learning to add an interval to any note automatically. Then transposing would be just adding the interval to the original key and it's done. Thats like learning the multiplication table, but up to 12x12.

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    *shudder*

    Could do it in base twelve? ;-D

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by emanresu
    I hate roman numerals. Here's why:
    VII-IV-III-V-VI-II-IV-VII - awful to read
    7-6-3-5-6-2-4-7 - much nicer.
    Well, I generally hate Nashville versus Roman, but you may have a point there...

  11. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    *shudder*

    Could do it in base twelve? ;-D
    We could but the French messed up maths with the decimal system.

  12. #36

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by emanresu
    I hate roman numerals. Here's why:
    VII-IV-III-V-VI-II-IV-VII - awful to read
    7-6-3-5-6-2-4-7 - much nicer.
    what have the Romans ever done for us?

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    and of course, until the goal is reached, these days there 's the working crutch of carrying a smartphone with the ireal software in it. Instant key change, saved!

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    about the Romans, the bog standards, and the Greeks...

    a. we use the Romans to refer to the scale tone of the root of the chord, eg I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII

    b. we use the bog standards 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 to refer to the altered intervals within "a", eg II##7, I+6

    so far so beautiful, logical, simple, perfect, fit for purpose

    c. we abuse the Greeks to derive Ionian, Dorian, etc (a big wish would be to hear, understand, and use those ancient modes as the classical Greeks did...I'm sure our Aeolian is not theirs, maybe a musico-historian could shed light)

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    It's just a bit long winded.

    I quite frequently end up playing new tunes on the bandstand without charts. Most of the time all you need to know when playing standards is the degree of the scale and whether that chord is altered relative to the diatonic chord.

    So - is the VI minor or has a raised 3rd, and so on.

    To be honest - you can develop you ear listening to the melody and work out what you can get away with under it, and what melody notes demand, for instance, a II7 chord.

    Obviously, you can learn this info for sure by listening to recorded versions of the tune.

    Which I suppose is pretty much the way people learned standards before everything became a lead sheet?

    On the band stand, someone might say as they did the other night- OK, Me Myself and I. The changes of this tune can be communicated this quickly

    "AABA. 1-2-5-1 A section. B section is Rhythm. Last A has an extra 2-5 at the end. In C."

    - A section 1 - 2 - 5 - 1 (the major 2 chord is expressed by the melody, so use you lugs as Dave Cliff would say.)
    - B section is I Got Rhythm (the old name was a Sears -Roebuck bridge, but that's a little obscure.) You need to know that's 3-6-2-5 all doms
    - Last A there's an extra 2-5
    - being given that info, any key is equally fine, as you learn those modules in all 12.

    This is obviously a very simple tune - Stella couldn't be communicated that way.

    Other examples of modules as I have head them called
    1-17-4-#4(dim)-1-6-2-5-1 The Horse (dim version)
    In this case whether the third chord is a 4m or #4 (or whether you have one at all)
    1-4-2-5 Honeysuckle Bridge
    #4(m7b5)-4m-3-6-2-5 Long/Cole Porter turnaround perhaps the second chord is 47 - again depends on melody

    Notice the rhythm is not specified. You have to lughole that (hear it)

    Unfortunately, these names aren't standard.... They will vary from person to person. The book Harmony with Lego Bricks has this basic concept... The only problem is my colleagues haven't read it so they use different names lol. I believe Pete Churchill teaches a version of this at the UK conservatoires, I should probably get a copy of his handout so I know what names they use.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    TL;DR It's the melody stupid

  18. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    It's just a bit long winded.

    I quite frequently end up playing new tunes on the bandstand without charts. Most of the time all you need to know when playing standards is the degree of the scale and whether that chord is altered relative to the diatonic chord.

    So - is the VI minor or has a raised 3rd, and so on.

    To be honest - you can develop you ear listening to the melody and work out what you can get away with under it, and what melody notes demand, for instance, a II7 chord.

    Obviously, you can learn this info for sure by listening to recorded versions of the tune.

    Which I suppose is pretty much the way people learned standards before everything became a lead sheet?

    On the band stand, someone might say as they did the other night- OK, Me Myself and I. The changes of this tune can be communicated this quickly

    "AABA. 1-2-5-1 A section. B section is Rhythm. Last A has an extra 2-5 at the end. In C."

    - A section 1 - 2 - 5 - 1 (the major 2 chord is expressed by the melody, so use you lugs as Dave Cliff would say.)
    - B section is I Got Rhythm (the old name was a Sears -Roebuck bridge, but that's a little obscure.) You need to know that's 3-6-2-5 all doms
    - Last A there's an extra 2-5
    - being given that info, any key is equally fine, as you learn those modules in all 12.

    This is obviously a very simple tune - Stella couldn't be communicated that way.

    Other examples of modules as I have head them called
    1-17-4-#4(dim)-1-6-2-5-1 The Horse (dim version)
    In this case whether the third chord is a 4m or #4 (or whether you have one at all)
    1-4-2-5 Honeysuckle Bridge
    #4(m7b5)-4m-3-6-2-5 Long/Cole Porter turnaround perhaps the second chord is 47 - again depends on melody

    Notice the rhythm is not specified. You have to lughole that (hear it)

    Unfortunately, these names aren't standard.... They will vary from person to person. The book Harmony with Lego Bricks has this basic concept... The only problem is my colleagues haven't read it so they use different names lol. I believe Pete Churchill teaches a version of this at the UK conservatoires, I should probably get a copy of his handout so I know what names they use.
    "Hearing the changes" by Jerry Coker and co has a lot of these old names for progressions. Montgomery ward, Sears Roebuck etc. It's also kind of the economist's approach to learning to hear changes, in that progressions are prioritised in order of most frequent use etc. :-) Modulations are covered as their own "types" as well. Extensive lists of tune examples, which are so much easier to utilize now, in the YouTube age, compared to when I first got it. I need to dig it out myself. Important skill...

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    Christian ,what you call this Bridge ?

    I7 , IV , II7 , V7

    Ps
    You going to see Jim on Sunday ?
    I might go ....

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by pingu
    Christian ,what you call this Bridge ?

    I7 , IV , II7 , V7

    Ps
    You going to see Jim on Sunday ?
    I might go ....
    That's Montgomery Ward changes.

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Has anyone worked with the John Mehegan books? He wrote a 4 volume set of really great (I think) improvisational theoretical and practical books. One of them has popular and standard song forms from early Dixieland through the tunes of the day, all in roman numeral format. I didn't understand why he did this at the time, but now that I think of it, it had a lot to do with seeing songs in aural structure and not in specific key.
    I know these books are long out of print. Maybe they were re-published at some point, I don't know. Bill Evans, the pianist, wrote the introduction and spoke highly of these volumes as I recall. As I said earlier, it has a lot to do with how we are taught to learn a piece that determines how easily we can make transposition.

    David

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by emanresu
    Ok, I try, hoping my engrish is adequate enough.

    So, I would like to be able to write the key change sequence down using one of these systems. And be able to remember and play from this also thing also. Just am not sure which way to do this. Maybe just do it all..

    I'm probably overthinking it though
    Quote Originally Posted by emanresu
    I came up with the most horrible idea about the matter now.

    What if learning to add an interval to any note automatically. Then transposing would be just adding the interval to the original key and it's done. Thats like learning the multiplication table, but up to 12x12.
    You can make anything into something so complicated that you won't want to bother.
    That's a science and art in and of itself.

    David

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    As I said earlier... Roman numerals... aren't for learning the tune. They are the result of an analysis. So they are basically used to help remember, not learn a tune.

    They work... and when on stage when doing quick head arrangements or trying to verbally explain something musical to other on stage musicians...Roman numerals imply tonal references.

    When I say V of I natural minor. I just gave a complete harmonic organization for creating relationships and how to develop them.

    I know what chord patterns to approach any chord in the tune etc... in any key.

    If you don't know the tune... even a transposed chart might not cover.

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    That's Montgomery Ward changes.
    I7 , IV7 , II7 ,V7

    Is it called Honeysuckle Bridge too ?

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    As I said earlier... Roman numerals... aren't for learning the tune. They are the result of an analysis. So they are basically used to help remember, not learn a tune.


    I know what chord patterns to approach any chord in the tune etc... in any key.

    If you don't know the tune... even a transposed chart might not cover.
    Hmm, I do suspect we're saying the same thing and the words (and labels) are getting in the way. For me, the Roman numerals are the way we speak of sound, as opposed to learning letters that translate to specific places to plant our hands on a fingerboard; there are people that do learn tunes that way, some of them are more than passably good at it.
    When I'm listening to music, and the band's playing a contrafact of Rhythm Changes, I hear and visualize a movement through the tonality that let's me see the leaps through III VI II V. Yeah, when I'm playing it, I'm not thinking numbers, but those numbers describe a path that's set in my ears.
    At this point, that aural guideline takes me through just about anything I can hear, but it's the Roman numerals I call them by. They call up sounds that are internalized in my sound library.

    Maybe that's completely different from the way others use this nomenclature, Yes, I learn something new every day.

    David

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by pingu
    I7 , IV7 , II7 ,V7

    Is it called Honeysuckle Bridge too ?
    Not to be confused with London Bridge, Chelsea Bridge, or Brooklyn Bridge which I think can be bought online now...

    David