-
I'm not. Mind you, there is something vaguely ridiculous about spending 2 pages analysing six notes out of a whole solo.
Milt Jackson never went to no hi-falutin music college. We're looking at these things from a modern perspective and we probably know too much for our own good. I tabbed out that solo, slowed it down had a good listen to it. It's very, very standard, just the usual format of that era. He played the chords as written, stuck a bit of diminished (nothing fancy, just a natural B) in bar 6, and put in some altered sounds over that C7. It probably doesn't matter what notes he used. Here's a guy who needed an altered sound so he went up a notch and doodled about. Hence the Db. He only did it twice in a row (precise same lick) and then didn't, just put some bluesy lines in. He liked slowish 12-bars, that was his thing. So here we come, picking and tearing at his notes like he was Einstein... he wasn't. That solo is very standard stuff. I'm not putting it down, the guy could play and put on a show, but his notes and approach to that solo is nothing stand-out. But then it doesn't have to be.
I don't know why the OP started this, or rather I do. Either it's an academic exercise imposed on him or he thinks that in micro-analysing stuff like this he'll play better. It won't. The thing to do is grab the principle of what's going on and then do it your own way. And it's not difficult. Finding something dissonant to play over the V chord is dead easy. Just slip-slide it if you're not sure.
That's my twopence. Take it or spit on it!
-
12-13-2018 03:19 PM
-
everything I write here is important and substantial for me... if takes 10 or 50 or 1000 pages.. then it is as much as needed...
Nobody forces anyone to get into it...
And I see nothing 'academic' in what I posted here.. everything was connected with music - how it sounds, how it works, how it plays and how it lives...
-
Originally Posted by Jonah
Just grab the principle.
-
Incidentally, this is why it's NOT Bo over the C7. There's a vast difference between an altered sound that works and one that doesn't because it's just wrong.
-
If I hear correctly you play it in a different place than MJ's lick comes up...
In blues - as I hear it there are two different IV-I moves...
One happens in the middle that in jazz goes like IV - IVo - I/V (you played that sequence too)
Another one is final plagal cadence IV - I that in just is often substituted with common dominant cadene or as set of ii-v's
The first type is like IV -V-I movement
The second type has very characteristic plagal V- IV-I sound... that's why doninant thing does not work here (or it should be totally subsituted with only dominant)
Maybe I do not inderstand what you mean really?
-
I find this thread quite funny.
If you spend a bit of time checking out bop and swing you are going to find a lot of instances of this type of thing.
The function of C7 is to move to F. The same is true of Bo7
A massive mistake people raised on CST make is to think that there’s really always a vertical correspondence between note choices and chords. Sometimes the horizontal considerations. - where the phrase is going - is much more important.
Anyway, Bo7 on C7 is something I play, and it sounds great. The function of say:
Gm7 C7 F
And
Bb Bo7 F
Is really the same. Invisible paths anyway - take a different route to the same (or related destination.) Play one on the other. If you know how to phrase towards the destination - the D say... it will sound great.
Another favourite example is when Birelli plays C#7 on A7, not a million miles away.
-
Originally Posted by Jonah
EDIT: i misunderstood your post. I basically agree I think? But as long as you have a chord that bridges Subdomiant and tonic you are fine
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Actually I chimed into this thread because I heard 'common thig' as uncommon and I found it interesting to understand why...
-
The V IV I movement was not in 12 bar blues during the bop era
'Another one is final plagal cadence IV - I that in just is often substituted with common dominant cadene or as set of ii-v's' (I meant ' in jazz' but I did not notice autocorrection in browser)
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
You show me how great it sounds* and I will bow to you... deeply :-)
* Over that standard 12 bar, not some obscure bebop thing.
-
Make sure you connect strongly into the resolution on the F chord. You are hearing horizontally into that resolution, not vertically on the C7 chord
Can’t record next three days at least
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Can’t record next three days at least
-
Originally Posted by Vladan
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
Anyway, I get what Jonah was talking about now... The IV sub in bar 10 of a Chicago blues. This is similar.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Originally Posted by Vladan
-
As I've done X and Y we might as well have Z too!
There are only three diminished chords so here, slowly, is:
Gm7 - Co - FM7 (wrong to my ear)
Gm7 - Bo - FM7 (the one I think is serious rubbish!)
Gm7 - Bbo - FM7 (the only one that works for me)
-
Yeah you aren’t phrasing through the barline
So the melody has to belong to C7 its own separate world. You have to establish a vertical relationship in this case.
The op line, that Bo7 is a kind of pick up into F - look at the way he enclosed the note F. Couldn’t be clearer! So the line is heard as —> F, not C7
-
Otoh if you strongly resolved Bo7 into a C7 chord tone it would obviously work.
So maybe we are talking at cross purposes. I don’t imagine the Bo7 to be euphonious to the C7. But I don’t really hear the C7 chord to be (necessarily) a euphonious chord in harmonic jazz (as opposed to modal)
One exception might be longer dominant chords like you get in the middle 8 of rhythm changes.Last edited by christianm77; 12-14-2018 at 03:24 PM.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
In fact, I don't know what you mean, if I'm honest! Through the barline?
-
There’s a book called Forward Motion by Hal Galper which has really influenced my thinking.
To summarise the idea, think of the line as a pick up into beat 1 of the F bar, and phrase into that note, imagining the beaming of eighth notes to go across the bar line. So in the example in the op, that D is joined onto the C. Then the notes after that C - F A etc is a new phrase.
In this way you are always playing into the resolution on the next chord rather than playing on the present chord. Bebop lines do seem to have this quality.
-
What I hear in that bar is Bb13 going to a fragment of a diminished chord, specifically, the B and D.
This leads back to F7, so the B and D give way, in the harmony, to a C and an Eb.
So, the harmony is a Bb7 going to a Bdim to an F7, which suggests, among other things, an ascending bass line, Bb B, C (that chord being F7/C).
I hear the underlying structure as an ascending harmonic line.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
I know bebop lines have that quality, absolutely, but this is just a standard 12-bar jazz blues. No doubt it can be played as hard bop but I don't think it started life that way.
RIP Nick Gravenites
Today, 05:48 PM in The Players