Chord Scale Theory Critique (Not Mine :-))

**ragman1** · 03-07-2019, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by bako

There is a level that I agree with you. On the other hand, I find the interaction and integration of two keys to
be an interesting subject.

G A B C D E F# + G Ab Bb C D Eb F

in 3/4, 1st chord gets 2 beats, 2nd chord gets 1 beat.

X X G D F# B ..... X X G D Eb Bb
X X G D F# A ..... X X F Bb Eb Ab
X C X A D G ....... X D G C E X
G X F# A D X

I hear this sequence in G major although I am consciously borrowing from Eb major to make a point.

I KNOW!!!!

That's the whole argument against CST (whatever that is), that it ties you into rules and regs which you deviate from at your peril, like any other fundamentalist ideology. Also that 'scales' are wonderful whereas we all know they're not.

I've played all kinds of stuff in the key of G because I don't subscribe to any theory or ideology, including CST. I keep repeating, if it sounds good, it's good. BUT there's such a thing as just playing totally the wrong thing so it sounds stupid. That's what I meant by the Eb example, that's all. It was simply an explanation which you've taken literally.

Imitation and conformity are non-creative, they destroy initiative.

**ragman1** · 03-07-2019, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher

Not science, grammar. I think you are misusing this term. The science analogy was just that, an analogy.

I'm not misusing the term 'theory' in this context.

Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster

**matt.guitarteacher** · 03-07-2019, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by ragman1

I'm not misusing the term 'theory' in this context.

Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster

Holy crap! Are you serious? Music theory is even used as the definition example for number four on the page you just linked . You're arguing that that definition is "wrong" because of the other definition. Words can have multiple different meanings.

**christianm77** · 03-07-2019, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher

You always go back to this definition of "Theory". It's not the ONLY meaning of the word. The theory is generally an abstraction , an idea , which may be possible to prove or not. Once the theory is proven , it doesn't stop being a theory. All the levels of abstraction in music are theory.

Theories don't simply remain theories until they're proven.They're just demonstrable as fact.

At least that's my understanding. I'm just a musician though. Christian is the astrophysicist. Maybe he'll weigh in.

I'm not an astrophyscist. I'm a man who studied astrophysics when the universe was half its present size (or so it seems.)

Anyway, in science a theory is evaluated on the specificity and testability of its predictions.

I believe this has some validity in musical analysis, although whether an analytical theory that fulfils that criterion aligns with pedagogical needs is a separate question.

Also my attack on terminology is somewhat motivated by Richard Feynman, an early intellectual hero. Feynman was quite into getting rid of the needless terminology and presenting complex ideas simply.

Also, he could swing.

**joe2758** · 03-07-2019, 11:44 AM

i thought he was an astrologist

**christianm77** · 03-07-2019, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by joe2758

i thought he was an astrologist

That's my sideline. I do you a horoscope for 20 GBP. PM me please.

**ragman1** · 03-07-2019, 11:49 AM

He's a lot of things, but not one of those :-)

**Jazzstdnt** · 03-07-2019, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by christianm77

And the relevance of this post is - what exactly?

The relevance of my post? Oh - that the OP is baseless, and hence irrelevant itself.

So,

A few questions:

Who are/were Barry Kenny and Birkett?
What are their credentials?
What are their contributions to Jazz Education?
Did they mention or promote any published jazz education materials that they DID like?
Did they offer any effective methods and means by which one can repeatedly and effectively teach and learn jazz improvisation?

A couple of points:

It's far easier to criticize than it is to contribute.
When it comes to learning jazz improvisation we spend a lot of time jawboning about what doesn't work.
It would be much more productive for all concerned to point to and discuss a means for positive outcomes.

**ragman1** · 03-07-2019, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher

Holy crap! Are you serious? Music theory is even used as the definition example for number four on the page you just linked . You're arguing that that definition is "wrong" because of the other definition. Words can have multiple different meanings.

I said in this context. I know if you want to look up how music works you go to a Music Theory site. The word in that sense means the principles behind the organisation of music... which is complex.

But the 'Chord-Scale Theory' is not that. That's a method of playing/improvising that someone put together. It's their idea of how it should be done. And, like any idea, it has its limitations which people are only too keen to point out.

No one is arguing with basic music theory. But they do argue with CST because it's not the same thing.

**christianm77** · 03-07-2019, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt

The relevance of my post? Oh - that the OP is baseless, and hence irrelevant itself.

So,

A few questions:

Who are/were Barry Kenny and Birkett?
What are their credentials?
What are their contributions to Jazz Education?
Did they mention or promote any published jazz education materials that they DID like?
Did they offer any effective methods and means by which one can repeatedly and effectively teach and learn jazz improvisation?

In terms of who is Barry Harris and who did he teach? I think you are trolling me, lol.

In terms of Barry's teaching - yes it's a clear methodology and it seems to work. It worked with me.

If you want to play bebop obviously. Probably not if you want to play super modern jazz, but I think bop is a vital rung in a jazz muso's education, and some pretty modern players have been through his workshops, such as Brad Mehldau.

At least the Birkett guy wrote a doctoral thesis.

OTOH you're an internet dude with no context.

A couple of points:

It's far easier to criticize than it is to contribute.
When it comes to learning jazz improvisation we spend a lot of time jawboning about what doesn't work.
It would be much more productive for all concerned to point to and discuss a means for positive outcomes.

No academic text, be it a paper, thesis or book, is immune from critique. I have in fact critiqued the OP quote for being a bit vague, and not having references that are easy to pursue. Also his attribution of Mehegan as a founding father of CST is sort of only half true at best.

So, your defence of CST has been, and please pull me up if this in inaccurate, based on the argument that CST is not well understood and often mis taught? Is that fair? I wouldn't disagree with that.

But, Ethan Iverson (for instance) makes the same basic critique of - let's call it "scale based beginner pedagogy" - as have many musicians I hold in high regard, Hal Galper, Barry Harris, John Etheridge, so and so forth. The Pat Metheny audio I posted clearly has Pat laying out what the student (a modal noodler by the sounds of it) needs to address, and it is similar, and the advice he gives influenced what I try and teach.

(I made a separate critique of CST as an analytical tool, but that's different.)

At some point I'll compile a bibliography of books I've found helpful. You can't go wrong with Barry DVD sets though.

I really can't imagine you've being paying much attention to anything said, TBH.

**ragman1** · 03-07-2019, 12:26 PM

This is always the problem with adherents to any fundamentalist idea. They are certain they're right and can't see anything else. Consequently arguing with them is largely pointless.

**christianm77** · 03-07-2019, 12:30 PM

It worth bearing in mind that sometimes you can debate with someone that is certain they are right, and they are actually right.

**christianm77** · 03-07-2019, 12:30 PM

I'm 100% certain the world is round. I don't think that makes me a globe fundamentalist (sorry flat earthers)

**ragman1** · 03-07-2019, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by christianm77

It worth bearing in mind that sometimes you can debate with someone that is certain they are right, and they are actually right.

Oh, I know. Personally :-)

**sgosnell** · 03-07-2019, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by christianm77

It worth bearing in mind that sometimes you can debate with someone that is certain they are right, and they are actually right.

Why would I ever bear that in mind? To quote Brother Dave Gardner, "I may not always be right, but by god I ain't never wrong!"

**Fz2016** · 03-07-2019, 01:29 PM

Hey guys in b7b5 shouldn't the F note be a be because it's suppose to be flatted? I'm confused lol

**Fz2016** · 03-07-2019, 01:30 PM

I meant E. Stupid keyboard.

**christianm77** · 03-07-2019, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by sgosnell

Why would I ever bear that in mind? To quote Brother Dave Gardner, "I may not always be right, but by god I ain't never wrong!"

That is a fantastic quote

**lawson-stone** · 03-07-2019, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by sgosnell

Why would I ever bear that in mind? To quote Brother Dave Gardner, "I may not always be right, but by god I ain't never wrong!"

I grew up listening to Brother Dave. Southern humor at its apex!

"If you ain't John... I'm GONE!"

**rpjazzguitar** · 03-07-2019, 05:07 PM

This thread is like driving past an accident on your way home from work. You're in a hurry, you've got other things to do, but you slow down and gawk anyway.

Just my personal experience with using scales. I was taught the scales in Chuck Wayne's system (and his arps) many years ago. I practiced them diligently and I can still play them (although some of his arp fingerings were awkward and I modified them).

When I started trying to play tunes, I didn't know how to use scales, really, so I relied on arps. TBH, it's still the way I play, mostly, for better, or, mostly, worse.

Later on, I learned what a tonal center is and I was then able to apply scales. Nobody ever suggested that I practice the scales in any way other than sequentially, up and down, in one position. That made it easy to play a lot of scales, but only from the root, like a European promoter?

Still later, I was exposed to the idea of a scale for every chord. I tried to integrate that into my playing, but it remained(s) substantially chord-tone based.

I have read a great many posts suggesting (or seeming to suggest) more sophisticated use of chord scale theory. They seem to fall into two main groups: 1) those I can't understand and 2) those suggesting years of work on combinations of X chord and Y scale, often based on geometric patterns (which I struggle to learn).

I don't need to be reminded that truly great players have made use of this material. This post isn't about them.

I found all of this tantalizing but very little of it to be truly useful.

I'll omit some of the journey here.

Eventually, I decided to learn, by note-name, the notes in the chords, scales and arps I use. It was, and continues to be, a lot of drill, but I believe it's actually more efficient than a pattern based approach. Most disagree.

And then, I made a conscious decision not to try to use any pattern or theory based approaches at all. Well, as a goal. Getting there is another matter.

My idea was to learn the sound of a tune, silently scat sing, and play that. That became the goal and the tempos at which I could approach it gradually increased to medium.

I'd always gone to jams and gigged occasionally, but, at that point, I started getting more calls.

In fact, there are some things associated with CST that I became aware of and, arguably, incorporated. For example, playing MM a half step up to get an alt sound. But, if I want to use math for that, I probably sound better if I think m9 arp a half step up rather than the alt scale. For m7b5 I find it convenient at times to think MM a b3 up. But, mostly those considerations are when the tempo is too fast for comfort and I'm scuffling to play something without clams.

Mimi Fox's book on arps for standards contains a few pages of devices ... this arp against that chord. I wish she'd write a tome with that type of material. Easy to grasp. Easy to work into your playing and every one sounds good (unlike, for example, the vague notion of "modal interchange" where some interchanges sound great and others don't -- still sticking the reader with the work of figuring out what's good). Mimi, btw, among her other talents has a vast encyclopedia of great ideas -- she apparently spent a great deal of time transcribing.

**ragman1** · 03-07-2019, 05:44 PM

I just play it like I hear it. If I hear an arp, it's an arp. If I hear a scale run, it's a scale run. If it's an altered sound it's an altered sound. That simple really.

Rhythm and phrasing dictates a lot of what and how much.

**rpjazzguitar** · 03-07-2019, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by ragman1

I just play it like I hear it. If I hear an arp, it's an arp. If I hear a scale run, it's a scale run. If it's an altered sound it's an altered sound. That simple really.

Rhythm and phrasing dictates a lot of what and how much.

Since jazz boils down to the ability to imagine an interesting line and play it right then, well, you're there.

All the theory is about learning to imagine more interesting lines.

**sgosnell** · 03-07-2019, 06:28 PM

"She was okay until me and Junior tried to turn her head around". "I just shoved it up into Race".
I saw Brother Dave on tour while I was in college. About 5'4", if that, and brought a trash can to the mic, which he used for an ashtray while he chainsmoked throught the act. "I'd smoke chains if I could light 'em". I used to have several of his LPs, and they're now available on YouTube.

**lawson-stone** · 03-07-2019, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by sgosnell

"He was okay until me and Junior tried to turn his head around". "I just shoved it up into Race".
I saw Brother Dave on tour while I was in college. About 5'4", if that, and brought a trash can to the mic, which he used for an ashtray while he chainsmoked throught the act. "I'd smoke chains if I could light 'em". I used to have several of his LPs, and they're now available on YouTube.

Gosh I could actually tell the story to those punch lines! I'll have to hunt for some YouTube fun.

Then there's Wendy Bagwell and Jerry Clower... but I always thought they were second-order talent compared to Bro. Dave.