Negative scales for Jazz Standards, practical applications

[cosmic gumbo]

Ernst Levy acknowledges it, and so does monster saxohophonist/theorist Steve Coleman. Must be legit....

[Hep To The Jive]

I find most only want to know enough so they can criticize it, not so they can experiment hear the sound. That's why these days I try to keep from posting or write the post and then delete like the other day. Negative/Symmetrical/Mirror harmony is like the Barry Harris stuff once you hear the sound, then you listen to music and hear it all the time. Plus Barry's b6 shhhh, that's from the negative scale, Barry hung with all those Beboppers and knows the sound.

You're doing more with negative chords, I'm need to work on that more. Since I'm in to improv I have mainly worked on negative scale for lines. So I can do as the old cats would say... "the wiggly sh1t" and the "pendulum".

Do I get this right, beboppers were using negative harmony? If so, I can only say that- everything that bebop players did could and have been analyzed and explained in much more convenient and familiar terms. I don't think I need negative harmony or scales to understand what's going on in Charlie Parker solos.

OTOH, if this is the theory that applied to Herbie Hancock and his generation and style of jazz players, then maybe yes, it make sense to me. I can't pretend I understand exactly what's going on in there.

Point is, many people are skeptical because of presumed practical application. So far the info has been contradicting. But I'm interested to see the further explanations.

[christianm77]

Jacob Collier says that he was turned onto these ideas by a Steve Coleman article... (I read this before the existence of youtube haha)

Probably this one:
Symmetrical Movement Concept | Steve Coleman
IIRC he had a nice thing about Bird's use of melodic cadences V7-I being the sun and Ivm6-I (or something) being the moon.

I didn't absorb the whole article cos it seemed a bit square pegs into round holes... Other might enjoy.

[Jazzstdnt]

There are many names for what's popularly called Negative harmony and some say you can see it being used all the way back to Bach. Stand up to full analysis that don't mean crap, analysis by who, for what reason, theory is just people coming after the innovators/creators and hanging label on things so they can charge money to teach it.

Well, that's a matter of opinion for sure.

Firstly, no one has ever made real money by teaching music friggin' theory, lol.

Further, and depending on what you mean by theory - if theory didn't exist prior to creation, and was only made up by observers after creation, then there would be no form, patterns or formulae.

• No 32-bar song structure,
• no AABA,
• no II-V-I
• no intros, endings, turnarounds, etc.

Why? - because no brilliant creator would do the same thing more than once, or twice.

Creators typically are focused on creation because they're interested in it, and occasionally excel at it. But - they work within limitations, constraints, and practices, no matter how few or how liberal.

I agree with your statement that they could/can count on others to form full theories though.

[christianm77]

I think most artists historically have functioned within a tradition. Norms, stylistic conventions (no consecutives, say) which are theoretical in so much as they are given as rules or guidelines, but not necessarily explored beyond that. Do as your told. This is THE way to write music.

I feel there is a bit of a crisis of context in the modern world - check out the GuitarWank with Adam Levy for instance. People just were in that culture and did what was required to work. Mozart was a working composer, catering to audiences.

Now we have many option. We chose to be jazz guitar players, and there are many other choices to be made - old school? modern? contemporary? etc etc

Aesthetic choices based on theory....

Freedom of choice is very stressful.

[Jonah]

I feel there is a bit of a crisis of context in the modern world - check out the GuitarWank with Adam Levy for instance. People just were in that culture and did what was required to work. Mozart was a working composer, catering to audiences.

That's what I always say.. even more I think in general we're in kind of 'zero point' culturally...


Another interesting point... one modern historian opened his cycle of lectures on 19th-20th cent. European history with a preword, he said approxamately:

If Plato came back to life in 4th century AD - he probably would have been surprised but he would have accomodated hinself to new conditions and kept developing his philosolhy... if it were in 14th century - some surprise maybe but still quite ok to go no...
and so on...
Even early 19th century he would have had a chance to adopt himself... but something happened in 19 th early 20th century that broke the connection totally... if he appears now he would not understand anything and feel like an alien in an alien world...


Personally... I am not Plato but I often feel that way too... I feel like basic notions have changed dramatically.

And art is influenced by that too.. artists are in the vacuum, they either have very strong feel of root and then they become nmore or loners (like my friend composer Boris Yoffe - who is genius actually) - not traditionalists in language! - but rooted culturally... or they have to create absolutely new lanbguage (like Xenakis for example) and then they are loners too because it's language created by himself for himself only...

[bako]

First off, every event that occurs in the negative side also exists on the positive side.
You can rest assured that there are no magical events that will be denied sans negative harmony.
For that matter, it is possible that All The Things You Are could have been written from a negative orientation
and we would be none the wiser about it. Just saying ...................

The Steve Coleman article on symmetry states that he spent a long period of time practicing/improvising
without concern for executing overt functionality, laying the groundwork necessary to have real time awareness
of these companion relationships. All here who have done so, please raise your hand.

First off, thanks to Hyppolyte Bergamotte for taking the time to cogently share his explorations into this subject.
Charting out modal equivalencies is part of laying a foundation for basic fluency.
Converting an entire progression to it's negative equivalent is a cool parlor trick.
In some ways, it would be similar to modally interchanging an entire song.
While very instructive, the potential for overkill is highly likely.
Different ways of thinking and hopefully hearing bring certain relationships to the fore.
As always, the choices we make musically are best when driven by what sounds good to our personal aesthetic.

[christianm77]

That's what I always say.. even more I think in general we're in kind of 'zero point' culturally...


Another interesting point... one modern historian opened his cycle of lectures on 19th-20th cent. European history with a preword, he said approxamately:

If Plato came back to life in 4th century AD - he probably would have been surprised but he would have accomodated hinself to new conditions and kept developing his philosolhy... if it were in 14th century - some surprise maybe but still quite ok to go no...
and so on...
Even early 19th century he would have had a chance to adopt himself... but something happened in 19 th early 20th century that broke the connection totally... if he appears now he would not understand anything and feel like an alien in an alien world...

I do not feel this is fundamentally a bad thing.

Furthermore, Adam Levy talking about his father a commercial composer/arranger places him in the context - put bread on the table.

There are still musicians who think that way but they no longer play jazz.

The commercial world remains - however every year it gets tougher for everyone who is not Max Martin

In terms of jazz guitar, I feel for a long time he context was connected to black dance music - swing in the late 30s and 40s, R&B and jump music and so on in the 50s and 60s. This provided context and the single biggest difference, I think, between that cohort of players and today’s.

So college becomes the social context and academic assessment criteria drive a certain approach to playing.

On the other hand, the black church has remained a strong context in music, and we see the results in Isiah Sharkey and so on.... what we might think of as the Benson lineage, which is a bit disconnected from the contemporary jazz thing.

Personally... I am not Plato but I often feel that way too... I feel like basic notions have changed dramatically.

And art is influenced by that too.. artists are in the vacuum, they either have very strong feel of root and then they become nmore or loners (like my friend composer Boris Yoffe - who is genius actually) - not traditionalists in language! - but rooted culturally... or they have to create absolutely new lanbguage (like Xenakis for example) and then they are loners too because it's language created by himself for himself only...

But this all happened many decades ago. What are classical composers doing now? Post minimalism seems the dominant aesthetic.

[Robertkoa]

I can understand negative harmony and ( superficially ) the desire to create new structures and progressions [ which I am starting to do but in a mainstream not outside but advanced way I think ]and have detoured into Jazz Harmony for the last year or two ...not microscopically ...just a good overview ..I would have done it earlier but didn't have the chops to really be a soloist anyway ..I do now .

I found too many 2 5 1s though it IS a really good way to write because the progression is so strong that it can be chained together in almost non sequitir ways and still sound intentional ..THAT as a fallback I wish I had learned 35 years ago.
As a Writer - when you don't have any real composition ideas OR you hear a Melody and want to Harmonize it ...then Modulate ...but want to be what John Lennon called a ' Craftsman' - 2 -5 -1's are a damn good way to get around - like being a bricklayer versus a sculptor.

Not to discount the possibility of writing good melodies and tunes like Tin Pan Alley ( hysterically funny name ) and they did write cool stuff and some stuff we called ' corny' as kids growing up on Rock &Roll and R&B which had a lot more passion in the Vocals usually.



So seeing something like 'Negative Harmony ' - there may be more to it ...but it does not appear to extend
Classical Harmony by consciously and purposefully releasing the energy of the tritone in different ways from V -I and vii- I for example and still getting results with different Cadences ...although I can see how Negative Harmony creates Backdoor Cadences ...it is a
kind of formulaic re -interpretation rather than' new '
Composition.

It is formulaic re harmonization - correct ?
The thing is ..IF it causes some cool music ..it doesn't matter does it ?

No...but reminds me of sticking a bunch more 2-5-1 s in a progression V of V of V of V of V - it gets old after awhile to my ears .

But it is a trick more than an Extension...remember
Ornette Coleman and James Blood Ulmer with
' Harmolodics '?

It seems kind of like that only much easier to explain and do ...but does Negative Harmony create any new Root Progressions or Modulations that ' work ' that did not exist before ?

[whiskey02]

Why not just announce to the audience that you're not going to play ATTYA and have at it?

[bako]

but does Negative Harmony create any new Root Progressions or Modulations that ' work ' that did not exist before ?

Everything that exists in negative harmony also exists on the positive side.
Everything that exists in positive harmony also exists on the negative side.

All it does is brings to the fore some companion relationships based on
mirrored intervallic structures. Once made aware, you have the option
to use or not use according to whatever esthetic drives your creativity.

To use this info in real time requires fluidity to think and hear freely on both sides of an axis point.
I don't possess that skill set at this juncture which puts me at a disadvantage to understand
the topic at any degree of nuance.

[Jonah]

But this all happened many decades ago. What are classical composers doing now? Post minimalism seems the dominant aesthetic.

Not quite... there are a few trends I believe: post-minimalism (as you called it) and post-Lachenmannism are probably the most influential...
To be honest mostly they do competitive BS

but again Boris Yoffe I mentioned above is active now) And he is out of any trend...

[christianm77]

What in the blazes is post-Lachenmannism?

[Robertkoa]

I like some of Coleman's stuff...

It's easier for me to just play it 'dark and menacing ' like that in the first place rather than invert something .. approach chord tones from further outside etc..
When I do sax -like stuff it's more like steering the patterns with some 'pre hearing' - I don't have time to think or I will break the Rhythmic Groupings....

Although- I just had a thought - Isometimes use Parent Keys for Modes ..
Is there a Negative Harmony Key Relationship to playing in the bVII Key over a i Minor ?

So over F Minor I might play structures from EbMajor Key = Dorian in most ways..
Is there a Negative Harmony Parent Key for that ?



I can't find the clip ...not sure it was 5 Elements or not but it was a really cool clip with Coleman and the Drummer and Bassist hitting some ferocious neo Funk Grooves with more going on but still in the 'pocket '.

It's not natural( nor am I capable ) for me to think of a scale then invert it
but stacking intervals and polyrhythms physically is- so I absorb some of what Coleman does .

He appears to keep the Urban Groove going even in his ' Rhythmic Cycles' - his Drummer(s) and Bassist(s) seem to keep it really funky much of the time which is what I like , Music that you can listen to and hear more ( Harmony , Rhythms etc.) OR just groove along with it..

https://youtu.be/eX4gUgBYjEk

Above is an example of Steve Coleman and his really cool Playing and Grooves- a cool Fusion of R&B , Funk and Jazz ..

So we are kidding a little about Negative Harmony but obviously it's inspiring some really talented Musicians..

[whiskey02]

What in the blazes is post-Lachenmannism?

What do the British say, "Don't be Daft"*.

It's anything AFTER Lachenmannism.



*That's what the British woman I worked with years ago said to me, more than once.

[bako]

Yeah, Steve Coleman is my main source for most of what I know about this subject.
He has developed real time dexterity with such things as negative harmony, simultaneous rhythmic cycles, etc.
He has stated that he was not born with these skills, it is a product of putting in the effort for an extended period of time.

We all make decisions about which ideas we believe will be helpful to our musical development at any given moment.
This is as it should be. While the idea of positive and negative harmony does offer some fertile ground for jokes,
I do wish people would be less cynical and derisive about approaches that differ from their own.

[Jonah]

What in the blazes is post-Lachenmannism?

Helmut Lachenmann's compositional conceptions are very influential among modern classical composers... and they have nothing to do with minimalism.

[christianm77]

Literally never heard of him and I consider myself have a decent lay understanding of modern composers. Learn a new thing.

There’s a lot of post-spectralism going on afaik in the UK. A lot of people studied at IRCAM.

[Jonah]

Literally never heard of him and I consider myself have a decent lay understanding of modern composers. Learn a new thing.

There’s a lot of post-spectralism going on afaik in the UK. A lot of people studied at IRCAM.

Yes! I thought there was something else I forgot... I could njt rememeber tha French composer.. now you mentioned spectralism.. Grisee and Murail...

Lachenmann is quite well-known though.

I had very deep interest in all that about 10 years ago or so..

I have to say all of this is (and was) quite far from my interests in music and composition... not that I am conservative... i just do not dig all this conceptualism and it seems pretentious

Even among minimalists I think I would prefer Morton Feldman... but can you really call him a minimalist?
For me he is much bigger than the movement or conception.

[Robertkoa]

Many say ' without Lachenmann there would be little or
no Lachenmannism '.

[DeathByIcePants]

Pretty interesting...This seems like a good way to gain a deeper understanding of "intervallic directionality" if nothing else.

[christianm77]

Many say ' without Lachenmann there would be little or
no Lachenmannism '.

That’s a strong statement

[Jonah]

Originally Posted by RobertkoaMany say ' without Lachenmann there would be little or
no Lachenmannism '.



That’s a strong statement

Maybe there would be just a very little Lachenmannism without Lachenmann?

Many would say then: hey... there was no Lachenmann ever but it looks like we have the tiniest Lachenmanism here... don't we?

[Endorphins]

Even among minimalists I think I would prefer Morton Feldman... but can you really call him a minimalist? For me he is much bigger than the movement or conception.

He is.

Not usually counted as a minimalist, but he sure sounds like one.