-
It isn't, I don't accept unarguable authority.
Neither was what I said exactly watertight academic level shit, but I did mention Tunedex historical charts etc.
in practice you said the same thing I said only with even less evidence lol.
Classic. I’d say you were trolling but I’m not entirely sure you are doing it purpose. Schrodinger’s trolling?
-
01-24-2022 08:09 AM
-
I get the impression that Ragman wants to use theories to explain the sounds he plays in his solos ....
It is undoubtedly hard work.
Practical ear training is an easier way-I think so.
-
Originally Posted by kris
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
Which brings us back to the very wise idea that the theory is only a guide, not a law, and we can play what sounds best to us.
what I would actually like to know (and this is in no way important for actually playing music, this is more of academic point) is when musicians started using this sound in this way. I think probably 30s? But I’d love it if someone could tell me more.
-
01-24-2022, 08:42 AM #80Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by grahambop
To speak the language of jazz you have to go to the sounds. The good old "imitate-assimilate-innovate" principle.
Whether a player has done the right things in his jazz studies should not be judged from the amount of theory he is typing on this here forum. To an experiened ear, that is obvious from the clips he posts.
You can be a theory pundit and still sound like shit because you never assimilated the language of jazz. You may know the rules without being able to speak it well.
I always focused on the sounds, the language myself. I did use theory to understand what was going on, but that was always secondary.
DB
-
01-24-2022, 09:25 AM #81Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by Lobomov
DB
-
Yeah DB. I also feel people get the wrong end of the stick because when talking about playing you inevitably end up using some sort of labels for what you are doing; unless you flat refuse to talk about it of course.
So when a player says ‘this is D melodic minor thing I’m using on G7’ for instance in a masterclass or online lesson, that might give people the impression that’s how they came up with the line, rather than just a labelling for the type of sound it is and maybe they got the line from Trane or someone, or maybe it’s their own take on a Parker lick or something.
(Some players do in fact come up with lines that way, but they tend to be good musicians with good ears and feel, not beginners.)
That said the most important thing that makes any of this stuff sound like jazz is the rhythm and feel and that can only be learned by ear; theory is generally pretty quiet about those things; you can play a stepwise scale and if it swings it will sound like jazz. If you can play one note with rhythm you can play jazz as Sonny said. If you can’t, there’s your problem, and that’s what I spend much of my time working on, not new ways to stack notes.
Transcription is the best way of learning how simple note choices are most of the time and how much of it is in the rhythm. Theory books tend to focus of the interesting exceptions.
-
01-24-2022, 09:45 AM #83Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by Christian Miller
DBLast edited by Dutchbopper; 01-24-2022 at 10:33 AM.
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Last edited by Tal_175; 01-24-2022 at 10:10 AM.
-
Originally Posted by Dutchbopper
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
it wasn’t just some system in a book.
Thats why Howard Rees did the DVD’s, right?
-
If the OP hasn't run off in fear--
it's a minor 6 because all chord spelling for all types of chords is based on the MAJOR scale.
So your formula for a m6 is R, b3, 5, 6.
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
The formula for a 7 chord is 1 3 5 b7.
I know you're joking, but why are we making this difficult for beginners? Know your major scales, know your formulas. Some of the stuff in this thread bounds on gatekeeping...
-
Online, I notice people often read statements a certain way.
For instance, if I say ‘theory is not necessary’ people often take this to mean ‘theory is never helpful’ or even ‘theory is harmful’ which to me are not at all the same statement.
I then often add extra text to try and make it clear (which just has the effect of making things long winded probably.)
A lot of the verbiage on JGO is generated by readings of this kind, attempts at further explanations and then the various camps entrenching about whatever thing they think the other person has said and basically talking past one another.
Maybe John A could tell me the formal name for this kind of thing.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
whats wrong with ‘it’s just a convention’? FSS if it’s good enough for maths…
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
I think we should all agree on something. Those who say:
"You don't need ears or language. Just play the 7th mode of melodic minor up and down, up and down, then dorian up and down, up and down. You're gonna sound great." are assholes.
I haven't met anyone who said this but apparently they are everywhere.Last edited by Tal_175; 01-25-2022 at 09:40 AM.
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
I usually do it to clarify something I feel is unclear or if the language comes across as a bit rude or whatever.
-
01-24-2022, 11:28 AM #99Dutchbopper GuestOriginally Posted by Christian Miller
DB
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
Julian Lage Trio - Sat 27th April - Marciac,...
Today, 03:57 PM in The Players