Using the Melodic Minor Scale over 2 5 1 Progressions

[christianm77]

Yes it is, but the question was asked about drawing chords from a singular scale.
My post addressed that scenario. Drawing on note collections from different scales is more the norm as you say.

At the same time, not a bad thing to be aware of the inventory of combinations that can be drawn from a singular scale.

Actually I realise I didn’t reply to the OP at all.

My real answer is ‘why would you want to do that?’ But each to their own :-)

[ragman1]

Which minor chords could I play in minor ii - V situations that would use the same melodic minor scale as that used over the altered V? Is it possible to resolve to a Maj7+5?

Say you have Dm7b5 - G7alt - Cm7.

You're asking what minor chords to use that would use the G alt (Ab melodic minor) scale. Is that right?

Obviously any that are derived from that scale, providing they sound okay. The Ab mel triads are:

Abm Bbm Cbaug Db Eb Fdim G dim.

The full chords are:

Abm/M7 Bbm7 CbM7#5 Db7 Eb7 Fm7b5 Gm7b5

You've got to test it yourself to see how it sounds and what you like.

Resolve to a CM7#5? Of course, why not? The root and 3rd are good depending on context. It's not used that much as a I chord, though.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Yeah. It's not usually one scale.

At a simplistic level, you can think of melodic minor modes as used in 2-5's as basically "subbing" for their harmonic minor counterparts. Harmonic minor's functional, so one scale for the whole thing.

Locrian sharp 2 is cool, if you haven't played with it for the II 7. For something hip and different, you can also play altered from the root of the II chord. Really targets the altered five strongly. Remember that the seventh scale degree of melodic minor is half diminished anyway.

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

[John A.]

Which minor chords could I play in minor ii - V situations that would use the same melodic minor scale as that used over the altered V? Is it possible to resolve to a Maj7+5?

Maybe I don't understand the question ... Using ii V I in C as an example, I think you're asking: the MM scale used for the V7 chord is Ab Bb Cb Db Eb F Gb; which flavors of D minor use those notes?

Pick any 4 of them (except F) and you could name them as some flavor of D minor. But the typical forms of ii min (ii min, ii min7, ii min 6, ii min11, sometimes ii min7b5) all clash with that scale to some degree. So another way to answer the question is "none." But the whole point of ii Valt7 is that Valt7 sets up dissonance/tension between ii on your way to I. If you made up a voicing of ii that drew notes from V's altered dominant scale, that would be the same thing as just playing Valt7, which isn't a chord change at all.

Can you resolve a V7 to I Maj7#5? Depends on what you mean by "resolve". You can certainly play I Maj7#5, but it leaves tension/dissonance hanging. If that's what you want to do cool (e.g., Stella). But that's an aesthetic question, not a "what's the right note?" question.

John

[Klatu]

So the solution might be to bypass the ii chord and just play the V.

[ragman1]

So the solution might be to bypass the ii chord and just play the V.

Why are you trying to ignore the ii chord? Play something appropriate over it. And the V and the i. What's the problem with it?

First do it the text book way, like harmonic minor over all, then see if you can fit a bit of altered in over the V. Then maybe change the i to a major.

Keep it simple. Walk before run, right?

[John A.]

So the solution might be to bypass the ii chord and just play the V.

The solution to what problem? In what context? Trying to achieve what musical effect?

I mean, you CAN think of a ii min7 as an inversion of a V11, or a ii min6 as an inversion of a V9 or a II min, or a ii min7b5 as an inversion of a V7b9, etc. , and just play a single voicing over two chords in a song. Whether you would want to or not is an entirely different question.

John

[ragman1]

Which minor chords could I play in minor ii - V situations that would use the same melodic minor scale as that used over the altered V?

Only if the whole ii-V-i is taken from the melodic minor scale in the first place.

Going back to those Ab mel min chords in my post above, the ii is a Bbm7 and the V is an Eb7. There you can play Ab mel min over both, and the i which is Abm.

But if you use Ab mel min as an altered scale over the G7 in a Dm7b5 - G7alt - Cm7 situation it won't work over all the chords.

Do you get this? Please say yes

[joe2758]

Do you get this? Please say yes

i don’t get it. first of all is Ab an A or a b

[Klatu]

Only if the whole ii-V-i is taken from the melodic minor scale in the first place.

Going back to those Ab mel min chords in my post above, the ii is a Bbm7 and the V is an Eb7. There you can play Ab mel min over both, and the i which is Abm.

But if you use Ab mel min as an altered scale over the G7 in a Dm7b5 - G7alt - Cm7 situation it won't work over all the chords.

Do you get this? Please say yes

yes

[Klatu]

The solution to what problem? In what context? Trying to achieve what musical effect?

I mean, you CAN think of a ii min7 as an inversion of a V11, or a ii min6 as an inversion of a V9 or a II min, or a ii min7b5 as an inversion of a V7b9, etc. , and just play a single voicing over two chords in a song. Whether you would want to or not is an entirely different question.

John

Those are fair questions. To be honest, theory is a bit scary for me as I am not a professional musician. I consider myself to be fairly well read in academic matters, but I am an acknowledged amateur compared to many of you.

As a result, when adding theoretical elements to my playing, I often look for ways to simplify their use as to make them more fluid and pleasant to listen to. For example, my "solution" to ignore the ii and just play the V is a way in which I can spend a measure playing just one melodic minor sonority instead of having to play two (which might overwhelm me in practice). As I become more comfortable with melodic minor arpeggios, I might then choose to add iis to the progressions and play two melodic minor patters in one bar.

I suppose what I'm trying to do is to inject melodic minor sounds into jazz standards so that I can apply more modern sounds to the American Songbook.

[John A.]

Those are fair questions. To be honest, theory is a bit scary for me as I am not a professional musician. I consider myself to be fairly well read in academic matters, but I am an acknowledged amateur compared to many of you.

As a result, when adding theoretical elements to my playing, I often look for ways to simplify their use as to make them more fluid and pleasant to listen to. For example, my "solution" to ignore the ii and just play the V is a way in which I can spend a measure playing just one melodic minor sonority instead of having to play two (which might overwhelm me in practice). As I become more comfortable with melodic minor arpeggios, I might then choose to add iis to the progressions and play two melodic minor patters in one bar.

I suppose what I'm trying to do is to inject melodic minor sounds into jazz standards so that I can apply more modern sounds to the American Songbook.

I'm not sure I follow what you're trying to get at here (you're using the terminology a bit idiosyncratically) ... But anyway, I don't play "progressions" or look for "solutions". I play songs, both comping and soloing, often with other people. So when I think about what chords and scales fit together (which I mainly don't do, but sometimes it's worth thinking things through in these terms), I think in terms of what voicings to use in my comping and what notes to draw from in my solos.

With that background in mind, if a song is written with a ii -V-I , and in comping I play only V-I while the rest of the band plays ii-V-I, it probably won't be noticeably "wrong" because many voicings of ii's and V7's are inversions of each other. However, it might make the song feel more static than it would if I used voicings that clearly differentiate ii and V7. That's an aesthetic question, not a wrong notes vs right notes question.


Turning to soloing, and melodic minor "sounds" on a V7, as I understand use of MM scales, that would either be the 4th mode of i MM or or the 7th mode of the MM a 1/2 step up from V.

I find it very hard to think this sort of thing through in the abstract, and think it's better to work from concrete examples. So, take the first 4 bars of Autumn leaves, in G/Emin.

| Amin | D7 | GM7 | CM7 |
( ii ) (V7) ( I ) (IV)

Potential MM's are 4th mode of G MM:

C D E F# G A Bb. (AKA "C Lydian dominant")

And 7th mode of Eb MM

Eb F Gb Ab Bb C D (AKA "D altered dominant")

Both have notes that are not diatonic to an A minor arpeggio or A dorian (which covers all possible extensions of the Amin chord). For reasons that can be expressed in terms of harmony/voice-leading or in terms of "well that's just what we're used to hearing" we tend to like those non-diatonic notes in the context of a V7 chord, but on ii or a I chord they tend to stand out and sound more "outside" (or even wrong). That's a possible reason not to just statically hang out on one of those MM sounds during the ii of ii V, or it's a possible illustration of how to create harmonic tension. Either way, try it and see if you like it. But in effect you'd be playing Valt7 - Valt7 - I in place ii - Valt7 - I. I'd call it a reharmonization, not a "simplification."

John

[matt.guitarteacher]

Those are fair questions. To be honest, theory is a bit scary for me as I am not a professional musician. I consider myself to be fairly well read in academic matters, but I am an acknowledged amateur compared to many of you.

As a result, when adding theoretical elements to my playing, I often look for ways to simplify their use as to make them more fluid and pleasant to listen to. For example, my "solution" to ignore the ii and just play the V is a way in which I can spend a measure playing just one melodic minor sonority instead of having to play two (which might overwhelm me in practice). As I become more comfortable with melodic minor arpeggios, I might then choose to add iis to the progressions and play two melodic minor patters in one bar.

I suppose what I'm trying to do is to inject melodic minor sounds into jazz standards so that I can apply more modern sounds to the American Songbook.

The separate melodic minor modes for the II and the five are a third apart. So, the kind of common entry-level approach is to play a melodic minor lick and slide up 3 frets etc. this works in melodic minor really well, because of its ambiguous nature in the first place. at the very least, it's pretty easy to play with this approach. Works for inversions and different positions etc.

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

[rpjazzguitar]

C lyd dom is C D E F# G A Bb. Against D7, it will sound like a D11b6

Isn't the more typical usage 4th mode Amelmin?

That's D lyd dominant, D E F# G# A B C which will sound like D13#11.

As I understand this, when the 7th chord is heading right to the tonic of the key, the 7alt is likely to work well. So, that would be Dalt going to G. 7th mode Ebmelmin.

But, if the 7th chord is not going to the tonic, like a secondary dominant, then the lyd dominant is likely to apply. Try it on the first two chords of Watch What Happens, Imaj to II7. In G, you can play an Eb against A7 and it will sound cool, but you can't alter both the fifths and ninths to play Eb F Bb C. Well, at least not as easily.

[christianm77]

Typical for whom?

Bach like to use the D melodic minor on A7 for instance. Parker too.

But the E melodic minor is common too.