The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Posts 51 to 75 of 246
  1. #51

    User Info Menu

    After spending 20+ years on CST, I went back to just using my ears and forgot about it.

    My playing became more lyrical and flowed with a more natural emphasis on the song being played.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #52

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    I don't think you probably meant it that way but, since you put that sentence in following a quote from me and put "tell you what to play" in double quotes, it looks like that's what I was saying or implying.

    I wasn't and I didn't. I said "it's basically about what can be played over what".

    The Wiki page was the only dedicated page on CST I could find, strangely. There were some others but they were superficial.

    I agree it's not that well written but it's not 'drivel', that's ridiculous! Why did you say that?
    Well the title is off and each sentence is worse then its predecessor, lol.

    1. Firstly it says Chord Scale System. System? So I guess it's not Chord Scale Theory? Should we stop reading right there?

    2. Then it mentions that it's an improv system. It ain't.

    and on it goes...

    Wikipedia is a collective of non-scholars and scholars who throw stuff out there - for free. You get what you pay for.

  4. #53

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
    Well the title is off and each sentence is worse then its predecessor, lol.

    1. Firstly it says Chord Scale System. System? So I guess it's not Chord Scale Theory? Should we stop reading right there?

    2. Then it mentions that it's an improv system. It ain't.

    and on it goes...

    Wikipedia is a collective of non-scholars and scholars who throw stuff out there - for free. You get what you pay for.
    Can you give us a definition?

  5. #54

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
    Well the title is off and each sentence is worse then its predecessor, lol.

    1. Firstly it says Chord Scale System. System? So I guess it's not Chord Scale Theory? Should we stop reading right there?
    If that's the extent of your imagination then, yes, I'd stop there. And get a life!

  6. #55

    User Info Menu

    I don't really know what the fuss is about with CST. When people start learning jazz they want to know what notes to play over all those funny chords. It's as simple as that.

    So the easiest thing for a teacher or a book to do is basically do what CST does which is show them the relevant set of notes based on the key they're in.

    When they've got the basics down then they can branch out more with other ideas and options. Whether one calls it 'CST' or not is beside the point.

    But the human mind being what it is the problem is that it's always looking for a safe method and that's how it gets locked into rigid thinking. It doesn't just happen with music, one can see that happening in many spheres of life.

    CST, like anything else, can become a cage if one lets it. The point is to see where it's useful and where it's not. In other words, use it but transcend it.

    As they say, descriptive, not prescriptive.

  7. #56

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
    A thought from Ed Byrne on CST
    - Chord Scale Theory - submitted by EdByrne
    ....which was from some essays he posted about his well received work - Linear Jazz Improvisation.
    FreeJazzInstitute -
    Ed Byrne's reduced melody process is really eye opening...it's my go to for "tough" tunes.

    I think it's the single most helpful improvisation framework method I've ever looked at.

  8. #57

    User Info Menu

    It's like baking a cake for the first time. The first time it's a bit nervous. You get the recipe, carefully measure out your ingredients, mix it carefully, make sure the oven's just right, and sit there chewing your nails hoping it'll come out just like the book says.

    The fourth or fifth time, you don't bother. You grab the stuff, stick it in the bowl, maybe add some extra cherries, put it in the oven, and go off and do something else because you know it's going to be lovely. Which it is.

    It's like that :-)

  9. #58

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by GuyBoden
    After spending 20+ years on CST, I went back to just using my ears and forgot about it.

    My playing became more lyrical and flowed with a more natural emphasis on the song being played.
    Well, that's just it. Why (don't get upset) did you spend 20 years on it without investigating other ideas, options, and other ways of playing?

  10. #59

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
    A thought from Ed Byrne on CST
    - Chord Scale Theory - submitted by EdByrne
    ....which was from some essays he posted about his well received work - Linear Jazz Improvisation.
    FreeJazzInstitute -
    First paragraph:

    "Chord Scale Theory is not the best starting point for jazz improvisation. Chord Scale Theory While all or most of the current jazz masters are well-versed in chord scale theory, they must also have a deep understanding of the composition from which their statements derive meaning. Scales and modes are now given prominence in jazz pedagogy—to the point of being the primary focus. While chord scale theory can be useful, it is not the best starting point for the student. Many students are frustrated after years of that discipline, finding in the end that their playing just sounds like a bunch of scales. The very talented can overcome this and develop meaningful melodic styles, but all too many cannot. Chord scale theory is an easy refuge for the lazy and uninformed teacher."

    Can't argue with that. Nothing to see here, move on.

  11. #60

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    TBH I'm not sure what function CST serves as analysis.

    I mean, a lot of the time it's just naming stuff. Oh look a D7 with a #11! Why that's Lydian Dominant!

    Great. Who cares?
    I think that's simplistic, Christian. A beginner looking at that #11 finds it scary and doesn't know what to do with it.

    But if you explain that the A melodic minor includes the G#/Ab then the fear disappears and they can play it, which is what they want to do. It helps them, they have a starting point. Then you can suggest the Eb melodic minor as another option... etc.

    We've all got to start somewhere.

  12. #61

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JCat
    First paragraph:

    "Chord Scale Theory is not the best starting point for jazz improvisation. Chord Scale Theory While all or most of the current jazz masters are well-versed in chord scale theory, they must also have a deep understanding of the composition from which their statements derive meaning. Scales and modes are now given prominence in jazz pedagogy—to the point of being the primary focus. While chord scale theory can be useful, it is not the best starting point for the student. Many students are frustrated after years of that discipline, finding in the end that their playing just sounds like a bunch of scales. The very talented can overcome this and develop meaningful melodic styles, but all too many cannot. Chord scale theory is an easy refuge for the lazy and uninformed teacher."

    You see the contradiction, don't you?

    'While all or most of the current jazz masters are well-versed in chord scale theory'

    Then:

    'While chord scale theory can be useful, it is not the best starting point for the student'

    Are they sure? The so-called jazz masters knew their stuff first then went ahead. But if you haven't understood the basic ideas then you risk building your house on sand.

  13. #62

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    TBH I'm not sure what function CST serves as analysis.

    I mean, a lot of the time it's just naming stuff. Oh look a D7 with a #11! Why that's Lydian Dominant!

    Great. Who cares?
    But really now... doesn't it give a really wonderful feeling when you can bark out a very arcane name for something when somebody says "Wow, that's really amazing playing, what creativity, what imagination, what inspiration!" Then you can say, "Yeah, well, it's just the 3.5 mode of the Regurgitationary scale ascending and the Coprophagian scale descending. Theory 101."

    Power. You think it's about talent and money, but no, it's about power.

  14. #63

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    You see the contradiction, don't you?

    'While all or most of the current jazz masters are well-versed in chord scale theory'

    Then:

    'While chord scale theory can be useful, it is not the best starting point for the student'

    Are they sure? The so-called jazz masters knew their stuff first then went ahead. But if you haven't understood the basic ideas then you risk building your house on sand.
    CST isn’t really relevant to a basic understanding

  15. #64

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    You see the contradiction, don't you?

    'While all or most of the current jazz masters are well-versed in chord scale theory'

    Then:

    'While chord scale theory can be useful, it is not the best starting point for the student'

    Are they sure? The so-called jazz masters knew their stuff first then went ahead. But if you haven't understood the basic ideas then you risk building your house on sand.
    I'm aware of the ambiguity around the subject and that's probably why we're so fond talking about it.
    We have all practiced scales on some level at some point in time and many of us still do on and off. I do it myself occasionally for multiple reasons. I'm aware that this practice may or may not be seen as CST, it much depends on the purpose of the exercise, my general awareness of the subject and my approach. I also understand that CST, like music theory in general can be used in a wider context to analyze, arrange and compose etc.

    I'm also aware that practicing scales is an important dimension of ear-training and muscle memory, and CST could be a useful tool. The hours I've practiced, naturally adds to my abilities, to listen, to interpret, to write and to improvise etc. so when I brag about my ears maybe I forget the time spent with scales and theory...

    When I've felt the need for deeper understanding, I've used the book "Jazz Theory" by Mark Levine. It's a solid reference. Parts of it could probably be referred to as CST, but I see it as a whole more like Harmony with a Jazz bias.

    Those of you who stress that "the purpose of CST is not to train improvisation" are misunderstood, because this is how CST is, and has been used for decades by the majority.

    -What if the students had to shift focus towards general Harmony? Maybe you see CST as subdivision of Harmony or possibly even the same thing?

    The important conclusions here are that players want to break free from the bonds of scales and get into melody and rhythm. The sooner the better, (obviously not saying one shouldn't practice scales).

  16. #65

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by lawson-stone
    But really now... doesn't it give a really wonderful feeling when you can bark out a very arcane name for something when somebody says "Wow, that's really amazing playing, what creativity, what imagination, what inspiration!" Then you can say, "Yeah, well, it's just the 3.5 mode of the Regurgitationary scale ascending and the Coprophagian scale descending. Theory 101."

    Power. You think it's about talent and money, but no, it's about power.
    Said Lawson with a sh*t-eating grin ...

    John

  17. #66

    User Info Menu

    OK so setting aside pedagogy for a sec, my questioning of CST analysis is this..

    #11 on a D7 is an example.

    We can teach it as a cool sound in isolation - rule of thumb "#11 sounds great on dominant, especially in these cases."

    We can build an extended tertial structure on D7 up to #11 - D F# A C E G#.

    We can hear these sounds on records...

    Also I don't think it's without value to know you can play Am (or Ebm) over this scale. That's useful information. A minor lines sound great on D7. People were doing this for 40 years before the publication of Jerry Coker's book. That's not anything the CST guys invented.

    So - what does relating that to the term 'lydian dominant scale' gain us? What extra understanding? And why ever think of these notes arranged in a stepwise scale?

    I mean specifically, not in general terms.... Maybe someone can tell me exactly.

    What I've come up with is, you can jumble the notes up and sound a bit modern.

  18. #67

    User Info Menu

    Because of this thread I started reading, for the first time, the Berklee Jazz Harmony book.

    I should have done so sooner. It defines a lot of terms that I frequently read in jazz forums.

    At the beginning, the book states its goals, which are quite abstract. It does not say "this book will teach you which scale to play over which chord". It alludes to value in several areas, one of which is improvisation.

    Then, as you read it, well, as I read it, it seemed like it was directed substantially at associating a scale with every type of chord/harmonic situation. Without quite saying it, it seemed to suggest that the improvisor should use the suggested scale in the suggested situation, for improvisation.

    So, if someone tells me I've completely missed the point, I'll listen, but I'll be very surprised if I'm the only one.

    As far as teaching the example that has been discussed -- adding a #11 to a 7th chord, my inclination would be to teach it this way.

    I'd find a place to play it in a chord melody so that the student can hear, say, D7#11 and how it compares to D7.

    I'll assume, here, that the student already knows the notes in a D7 and can find them on the neck.

    Then, I'd point out that getting that sound means putting a G# in the improvised line. You've got D F# G# C for chord tones. You still have the usual extensions of 9 and 13, so add E and B. Since it's a 7th chord, you'll avoid the nat7. Since you have an F# and a G#, you'll avoid G. If you use a nat9, you'll avoid b9 and #9. That's every note except A and Bb. You can use A, or not. Bb is for another lesson.

    So, now, what have we got? D E F# G# (A) B C. I'd call it a D13#11 scale or maybe a D7#11 scale and mention casually that it has a Greek name too.

    The point to this is to match the sound to the chord melody I mentioned at the beginning and match the notes up to the chord name.

    Then, pick some tunes and figure out where it can be used. Probably best by starting with comping or chord melody and seeing where a D7#11 makes sense. Then solo on it.

    In the bit of High School guitar teaching I did last year, the more advanced students were very curious about "modes". They're heard the word and understood that they were important. But, I wouldn't have wanted to begin with a theoretical exposition about how modes or non-major scales are constructed. I think it would be better to start, as above, with the sound of chords in songs and drill down to the notes that will sound good in specific situations and, at the end, mention the Greek name.

  19. #68

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by lawson-stone

    Power. You think it's about talent and money, but no, it's about power.
    Lawson, put down the Foucault.

  20. #69

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    CST isn’t really relevant to a basic understanding
    What do you call a basic understanding? How to play a C chord? The moment you can play over a 251 that's CST, call it by any name.

  21. #70

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JCat
    I'm aware of the ambiguity around the subject and that's probably why we're so fond talking about it.
    From my point of view there's not a great deal to talk about. It's what-to-play-over-what, that's all. Which doesn't mean one has to become a slave to it.

  22. #71

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Lobomov
    Nonsense ... show him a #11 and he will listen to it and apply is where he thinks it sounds cool. It's not like the 'blue' notes in the blues scale seem to confuse beginners, is it?

    Show him the Eb melodic minor and he will play that scale up and if lucky down over and over again like a robot
    Your name's not Christian.

  23. #72

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    OK so setting aside pedagogy for a sec, my questioning of CST analysis is this..

    #11 on a D7 is an example.

    We can teach it as a cool sound in isolation - rule of thumb "#11 sounds great on dominant, especially in these cases."

    We can build an extended tertial structure on D7 up to #11 - D F# A C E G#.

    We can hear these sounds on records...

    Also I don't think it's without value to know you can play Am (or Ebm) over this scale. That's useful information. A minor lines sound great on D7. People were doing this for 40 years before the publication of Jerry Coker's book. That's not anything the CST guys invented.

    So - what does relating that to the term 'lydian dominant scale' gain us? What extra understanding? And why ever think of these notes arranged in a stepwise scale?

    I mean specifically, not in general terms.... Maybe someone can tell me exactly.

    What I've come up with is, you can jumble the notes up and sound a bit modern.
    I said a beginner. You know, someone who wouldn't understand your post :-)

  24. #73

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    What do you call a basic understanding? How to play a C chord? The moment you can play over a 251 that's CST, call it by any name.
    No it's not.

    (Or perhaps it is in a sense, in the sense that Steve Davis was a physicist, if I'm being charitable about the analytical value of the theory.)

    Doesn't matter... It's not relevant to the process of teaching someone to play changes, for instance.

  25. #74

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    Lawson, put down the Foucault.
    Nothing good ever comes of my being on the forum while actually busy at work on research and writing. Lord knows what I'm putting into this book I'm working on. I may bust out the word "phrygian" somewhere in connection with some archaeological find...

  26. #75

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
    Ed Byrne's reduced melody process is really eye opening...it's my go to for "tough" tunes.

    I think it's the single most helpful improvisation framework method I've ever looked at.
    Can you say a bit more about it?