Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    I ran across this video by Jim Campilongo this morning looking at "On the Sunny Side of the Street." He takes a fake book chart and distills it down to the fundamental (no pun intended) chord progression. I don't usually look at Real Book charts, etc., in quite this way so I found it interesting. Understanding the bones of the tune, of course, is essential to being able to play the thing. I found a lot of parallels in his approach to how Joe Pass talks about analyzing songs- basically breaking it down to tonic and dominant chords.


  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    I saw that about a week ago, and it really opened my eyes on how to arrange something for oneself. In my defense, I'm not a jazzer, so alot of this video is probably rudimentary stuff for alot of people here, but after watching it, I feel more confidant about attacking alot of standards I want to learn, but when I see the sheet music, it looks daunting. Now it doesn't seem as daunting to me.

    Jim is one of my absolute favorites. His Patreon page is a good one, along with Duke Levine's. (that's more the style I play, not so much straight jazz, but more like them... whatever you would call it. )
    Last edited by ruger9; 04-11-2021 at 12:53 PM.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Everything is one and five.

    I still think-- not that im an expert-- but I think it's good to be able to nail everything change in your line. That's what practice is for.

    Then, you try your best to not do that all the time. But you still CAN, if you WANT.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Frank Vignola teaches the same approach in his Jazz Studio at Truefire: learn the chord progression using basic chords and chord shapes and take it from there - makes tunes much more accessible.

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Distrilling tunes down to tonic, subdominant and dominant chords not only shows you the deep structure of the tune, but unfolding the actual changes back teaches you about different approaches to reharmonization and passing chords. You learn how to turn a simple harmonization into something more colorful and original. Very useful skill for comping and making your own chord melody arrangements.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 04-17-2021 at 07:42 AM.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Ralph Patt Vanilla Book; if you are unsure where it start with this look at this and compare to Real Book chart.

    TBH after a decade or so of thinking about and teaching this stuff I think the Riemann functions are kind of useless. Why? Well, not everything maps to three chords (although a surprising amount of it does) and if it doesn’t why bother with the name? Just write down a reduced chart and that’s a perfectly valid analysis.

    Use Nashville numerals if you want to have a transposing chart (although you can get into the woods with how to do this with a modulating tune...)

    For instance Peter Bernstein thinks in two functions - dominant and tonic, which you could call moving and static. But the melody has to be your guide, whether written or improvised.

    The more I learn about different approaches the more this is a common trait among experienced and high level straight ahead players. Needless to say Barry Harris has his own version of this.

    But against a very simple framework is balanced a very detailed appreciation of foreground details. You need both.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    Distrilling tunes down to tonic, subdominant and dominant chords not only shows you the deep structure of the tune, but unwinding back to the actual changes teaches you about different approaches to reharmonization and passing chords. You learn how to turn a simple harmonization into something more colorful and original. Very useful skill for comping and making your own chord melody arrangements.
    I didn't think of that, but of course it makes perfect sense. Learning how to DE-construct something also shows you how it's built.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    You can also treat diatonic harmony explicitly as just embellished I and V chords:

    Cmaj7 - G7sus/D - Cmaj9/E - G13sus/F - G7 - Cmaj6/A - G9/B

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    You can also treat diatonic harmony explicitly as just embellished I and V chords:

    Cmaj7 - G7sus/D - Cmaj9/E - G13sus/F - G7 - Cmaj6/A - G9/B
    The guy from the Jazz Duets channel on youtube has a tutorial on that - harmonising the major scale with only I and V chords.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by TOMMO
    The guy from the Jazz Duets channel on youtube has a tutorial on that - harmonising the major scale with only I and V chords.
    I'm not familiar with that channel but the way I see it is just as an extension of seeing substitutions as the extended version of the substituted chords. For example, Emin7 can be seen as a tonic substitution for Cmaj7 or it can be seen as Cmaj 9. When this is applied to subdominants as dominant substitutions, you get the major scale harmonized as I and V chords.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Barry Harris nailed it, IMO.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Why would I exclude or simplify what I hear in the music?
    Why would I train my ear not to hear what is in the music?
    Why would I play something other than what I hear in the music?

    Simplifying the progression
    Reducing chords to basic form
    Calling everything tonic or dominant
    I don't believe in these things.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    You can also treat diatonic harmony explicitly as just embellished I and V chords:

    Cmaj7 - G7sus/D - Cmaj9/E - G13sus/F - G7 - Cmaj6/A - G9/B
    I like that..a lot.

    I'd add that you could see the ii-7 as a subdominant IV ie F6, so for me the scale would run tonic, subdominant, tonic, subdominant, dominant, tonic, dominant.

    Just my take.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Bill Thrasher was the same, he'd say, "think simple, play fancy"

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Bill Thrasher would sometimes make an extended lesson out of a standard, here are two of the pages on Satin Doll (there were 12 pages in this lesson). This is the "Think Simple Play Fancy" thing:
    Attached Images Attached Images Finding the core progression (Jim Campilongo)-sd-1_0001-jpg Finding the core progression (Jim Campilongo)-sd-2_0001-jpg 
    Attached Images Attached Images

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    And, until you HAVE THE CHOPS to "play fancy", you can still play the songs by doing what JC does in the OP: simplify it back to it's base form. Both are valid (not saying that you are saying they are not). But until you have processed technically to "fancy"... playing "simple"... especially at "dinner gigs" where you are little more than mellow background noise... makes it easier, and you can embellish if you feel confidant enough. But this is elementary: it's how everyone learns stuff.

    In a JC interview how he talked about using a certain residency gig AS practice- I think it was an afternoon gig, at a winery or something... he and his band went through new material, practicing arrangements etc, ON the gig. Because no one cared.