The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 26 to 41 of 41
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    man christian... I love your vids... but, it took for ever to get to, The line is just borrowing from parallel minor. Many old school musicians just use basic tonal functional concepts.... like, Borrowing, relative and parallel and then simple subs. Very simple and very effective.

    ... yea theory is just a tool to help you be able to hear, understand and maybe even verbally have a discussion about as rp said, " great time, great chops and a rich vocabulary of classic jazz phrases".

    The other aspect of having an understanding of theory, well harmony, is the ability to hear and recognize where or what other players want to go musically. I perform with way too many vanilla musicians, where... I know some things are just never going to be heard, melodically, harmonically and the worst, rhythmically...and when they do... it's fairly limited. It's cool, I still dig performing, it's just what it is.... but there are many really good musicians that at least have jazz harmony and theory concepts together. Performing can really become fun... which usually is also entertaining.

    I think I posted above... or before, being able to make or have an analysis of what ever your playing, really helps. REALLY HELPS... that's not just some memorized versions. It's cool when playing gigs, during breaks... when talking about what we played etc... when something simple, harmonic/ theory BS... opens the door for some players, what they thought was working.... expands, maybe even become a better player. Although... we all have our style... what we like. I'm pretty simple.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    I wouldn’t disagree with that analysis Reg, and I think it’s the simplest, but I was trying to make different points in my video. I could have been talking about any phrase.

    The main one is that theory always simplifies what you are looking at. If it didn’t it wouldn’t be theory. My argument is that is what theory is - taking a quality from a passage of music and hanging a descriptor or name on it. ‘Altered scale’, ‘3:2 polyrhythm’, ‘ii v I’ etc

    Not every jazz musician would analyse the phrase the way you did for instance. And they wouldn’t be wrong per se (although i think your explanation makes the most sense historically speaking) but by abstracting it and simplifying it as a different thing.

    So you take that simplified essence of the phrase whatever that is, and then come up with music based on that idea. That’s what theory is in a jazz context, because theory has little use to an improviser if it’s not anchored in actual practice.

    So for you that would coming up with phrases in Bb minor resolving to the Bb major chord, or whatever.

    So theory and your own concept is based on the way you hear music. And of course one person can have multiple ways of hearing/looking at phrases.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Yea Christian... sorry if I over simplified. Your points are great. Generally when I make analysis of music, it's not in isolation, it has context and the result is simply the base reference. The starting point for where new relationships are created and developed.

    CST uses standard Functional Harmony guidelines and simple common practices of jazz, to realize typical complete note collections, (scales), for secondary dominants, (any V7 going to any Diatonic chord other than I), and the same with Tritone subs.

    It gets a little more complicated when we add extended II-'s and implied targets.

    A secondary Dom. implies a tonal target... it's temporary, doesn't change the Key of the moment. Key of the moment implies the expectation of a I chord. Secondary dominants generally don't imply modulation. (if you get into Dual function you can open the modulation door).

    The Functional harmony aspect could be... like I said, the use of borrowing, (not Modal Interchange), for expanding harmonic and melodic choices with the use of Relative and Parallel relationships. Which like you pointed out was very common during Wes's period... the classic user was Cole Porter standards. ( I dig Wes's approach better, but same thing).

    Any way... my point was... sorry if I jumped the gun.

  5. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Yea Christian... sorry if I over simplified. Your points are great. Generally when I make analysis of music, it's not in isolation, it has context and the result is simply the base reference. The starting point for where new relationships are created and developed.

    CST uses standard Functional Harmony guidelines and simple common practices of jazz, to realize typical complete note collections, (scales), for secondary dominants, (any V7 going to any Diatonic chord other than I), and the same with Tritone subs.

    It gets a little more complicated when we add extended II-'s and implied targets.

    A secondary Dom. implies a tonal target... it's temporary, doesn't change the Key of the moment. Key of the moment implies the expectation of a I chord. Secondary dominants generally don't imply modulation. (if you get into Dual function you can open the modulation door).

    The Functional harmony aspect could be... like I said, the use of borrowing, (not Modal Interchange), for expanding harmonic and melodic choices with the use of Relative and Parallel relationships. Which like you pointed out was very common during Wes's period... the classic user was Cole Porter standards. ( I dig Wes's approach better, but same thing).

    Any way... my point was... sorry if I jumped the gun.
    Hey Reg, I know you've listed them before , but I wondered if you might just list music theory books that you think are important for players of harmonic instruments.

    And then maybe extend that list to those eventually interested in more advanced /arranging type harmonic theory. I need to have this saved somewhere for my "someday/possibly" list.

    Thanks.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    Hey Matt,

    Stuart Smith's Jazz Theory is a good basic start, it free all over the web.

    Leon Dallin's Techniques and some of his other books are great for blending traditional theory and jazz theory... I was lucky to have some conversations back when I was at UCLA, he was at Cal St Long Beach.

    And for some more modern concepts check out this doctoral essy from Jared Hall at Univ. Miami

    http://scholarlyrepository.miami.edu..._dissertations

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    So how many answers are there, LOL! As much as its important to put time in on theory and practicing scales, it's more important to just play songs. Especially in the style you want to emulate .

    George Benson once said it really is just Major,Minor,Dominant,Diminished and Augmented. Sure there are more variables,but really it's a matter of listening and learning the Jazz vocabulary . Just learn songs especially the melody,song form and bass movememt.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Where is the OP, having asked the question? I really hate people who disappear!

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Where is the OP, having asked the question? I really hate people who disappear!
    Probably suffered brain shutdown from too much info

    ‘Karma police, arrest this man, he talks in maths...’

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    The lick in your vid was quite interesting.

    The notes over the F7 and BbM7 were straightforward:

    F Eb C (1-b7-5 - (passing C#) - D (3rd of Bb).

    But the notes Ab-Gb over the Cm7 don't bear much relevance to a Cm7. That might seem confusing to some.

    I see that as Wes ignoring the Cm7 and playing the #9-b9 of the F7. A lot of players say just think in terms of the dominant, never mind the ii. I think that was Joe Pass' thing too.

    Although, of course, they both played lots of minor stuff over ii chords.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    The lick in your vid was quite interesting.

    The notes over the F7 and BbM7 were straightforward:

    F Eb C (1-b7-5 - (passing C#) - D (3rd of Bb).

    But the notes Ab-Gb over the Cm7 don't bear much relevance to a Cm7. That might seem confusing to some.

    I see that as Wes ignoring the Cm7 and playing the #9-b9 of the F7. A lot of players say just think in terms of the dominant, never mind the ii. I think that was Joe Pass' thing too.

    Although, of course, they both played lots of minor stuff over ii chords.
    Could be. In this understanding Wes is bringing out the F7 altered sound. Or maybe a B7 sound by tritone substitution.

    Another angle is to look at that ii chord as a Cm7b5 and therefore an Ab7(9) as I mentioned in the video. The notes fit Ab mix/C locrian until we hit the D... so a backdoor dominant...

    Which is also Bb natural minor (reg.)

    There is no leading tone in the line (the third of F7, the seventh of the key Bb) so it gives it more of a floating subdominant quality.

    Wes often avoids the leading tone resolutions you find in explicit V-I Oktoberfest type revolutions instead playing IV-I plagal sounds (as do gospel choirs, but that’s another story, Wes would rather be in church than in the beer hall haha)

    Do you see what I mean? Lots of interpretations!

    Anyway that #9-b9-1 thing is unbelievably common in jazz lines. Name a jazz musician - not just boppers either.

    It crops up in the standards Green Dolphin Street, satin doll, Moonlight in Vermont....

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    A further riff - Robben Ford sees that sort of thing, and the closely related 1-b9-#9-3 as relating to the F half whole diminished scale. He heard it from Miles Davis.

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77

    Anyway that #9-b9-1 thing is unbelievably common in jazz lines.
    Just what I think. Wes couldn't read music so he did it by ear. There will be lots of copying, I suspect.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    Anyway, it's almost time for Silent Night again...

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ragman1
    Just what I think. Wes couldn't read music so he did it by ear. There will be lots of copying, I suspect.
    Yeah sure, I mean that’s the dimension that gets overlooked in that kind of music theory - like all of the things I just posted. Jazz music until the college era was to my ears primarily a music of idioms.

    For instance Parker loved that device, and everyone copied Parker, so everyone played it. Parker himself was drawing form diverse sources - Prez, musical quotations, bits of Dixieland language, Stravinsky, Bizet, all sorts.

    To talk about scales and pitch collections is to overlook that side of it I think, which is why it’s generally necessary to learn the music by ear to be able to speak the language fluently....

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    There's no one way to deal with secondary doms, it depends on the tune. There are straight sounds, b9 sounds, #11 sounds, blues sounds, diminished sounds, all sorts. It depends.

    Same with tritones. #11 and diminished sounds are pretty good with them although that depends as well.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    Demos are always boring but I like to do them occasionally. This is

    CM7 - D7 - Dm7/G7 - C6
    CM7 - Ab7 - Dm7/G7 - C6

    They're all different. There's a more extreme one at the end which gives a 7b9b13 sound without using the altered scale. It's deliberately slow to avoid fudging and, of course, it's not related to any particular tune which makes a big difference in performance.