Is minor "home" (Im) dorian, melodic, neither?

[Christian Miller]

Very nice handout. Thanks for posting it.

Even though I know the underlying material at some level, I still had to think about it to translate the scale names into the actual differences in notes.

Natural minor has b6 and b7.
Melodic minor has 6 and 7.

I wonder if it would be difficult (well, it would for me, but in principle) to find examples of great soloists using the other two options, meaning b6-7 and 6-b7? And, for that matter, three or four of those notes in the solo.

I still wonder if it would be simpler to label the minor scales with the 6 and 7 in the scale name. e.g. Cmb6b7. Cm6b7 and so on.

Why I just recorded a rant on a very similar subject. Why yes! The names are somewhat unconnected to the scale construction in a way that isn’t true of chord symbols. I think it’s a waste of cognitive energy to remember that stuff tbh.

in my system (tm) melodic minor would simply be called minor or m6 (as all scales are related to the major and melodic minor is one note different), Dorian would be m7 and so on.

And, if that might lead to teaching all of them as one 9 note scale with the 6 and 7 selected based on the chord of the moment.

I would probably support that too. This is true of bop players 100%. This sort of thing



But - it is not true that all players use the scale equally freely. Notice how strict Blue is to the melodic minor.

Also notice that big stepwise melodic minor scalar run. Sounds great. Classic trumpet move.

[ragman1]

Oh, no.

Well, it looks as though I'm a victim of my own bias, having told alez that the natural minor was so rare, etc, so ignore it... Reg has got it right:

Blue Bossa.... if your calling C- as implied in melody, the Relative Min. of Key of Eb..... Nat. min. Aeolian

It's obvious what Blue Bossa's in. It's not harmonic or dorian, etc, it's in Eb, i.e. C natural minor. That's why there are no natural B's or A's.

Thank you, Reg. Not often I say that but it must be acknowledged :-)

[pamosmusic]

Oh, no.

Well, it looks as though I'm a victim of my own bias, having told alez that the natural minor was so rare, etc, so ignore it... Reg has got it right:



It's obvious what Blue Bossa's in. It's not harmonic or dorian, etc, it's in Eb, i.e. C natural minor. That's why there are no natural B's or A's.

Thank you, Reg. Not often I say that but it must be acknowledged :-)

I have to ask.

Why does Reg say it and earn a smile face when a whole thread full of people have been saying it all day and it gets called “academic BS”

I must say. I’m feeling a bit put out.

Where’s my cordial smiley face?

[rpjazzguitar]

But - it is not true that all players use the scale equally freely. Notice how strict Blue is to the melodic minor.

Also notice that big stepwise melodic minor scalar run. Sounds great. Classic trumpet move.

If you use names which call out the 6s and 7s, like Cmb67, then you'd also have the option of naming the scale according to whichever 6s and 7s you actually used. So you could have, say, Cmb6,6,b7. That's cumbersome, but not as cumbersome as using a 7 note scale name and having to append an explanation of an added note. It also might better reflect the way jazz is actually played.

I agree completely with your comment about cognitive energy. A precious thing to waste.

[pamosmusic]

Again for posterity:

Me:

I think the melody of Blue Bossa would disagree.

Also me:

Blue Bossa or something would be an interesting case. Usually marked as a specific minor 7 chord and has the b7 in the melody. The F minor following it gives you Ab, but technically the Ab isn’t in the melody over the C minor and the Dorian vibe sound nice over that chord.

Christian:

its a b flat in the melody though…

Oh hey, it’s Christian again:

Dorian? The key signature has three flats. The melody is pure natural minor until we hit the modulation. To be honest I’d probably avoid the m6 on this tune comping. madd9 again maybe haha.

And finally … Reg …

So example... Blue Bossa.... if your calling C- as implied in melody, the Relative Min. of Key of Eb..... Nat. min. Aeolian etc...

and

Generally I like to play C- as Dorian more of a Bluesy C-7 D-7 feel and keep F-7 as Dorian vamp feel .

Sounds like same sh** different jazz nerd to me. Oh well. Sigh.

[Christian Miller]

If you use names which call out the 6s and 7s, like Cmb67, then you'd also have the option of naming the scale according to whichever 6s and 7s you actually used. So you could have, say, Cmb6,6,b7. That's cumbersome, but not as cumbersome as using a 7 note scale name and having to append an explanation of an added note. It also might better reflect the way jazz is actually played.

I agree completely with your comment about cognitive energy. A precious thing to waste.

Yeah I just use ‘m6’ for melodic minor because it ties it to the chord symbol then. Nice and easy.

m7b6 or m7b13 for Natural minor. People make this equation anyway in chord scale theory. It’s to get rid of the scale name and unite it with the chord right away.

or you could have your nine note scale and focus on how the individual notes within it actually sound.

[Christian Miller]

I have to ask.

Why does Reg say it and earn a smile face when a whole thread full of people have been saying it all day and it gets called “academic BS”

I must say. I’m feeling a bit put out.

Where’s my cordial smiley face?

Brother Pete, madness lies that way.

Brother Rag revels in the arbitrary and obtuse.

[pamosmusic]

Brother Pete, madness lies that way.

Brother Rag revels in the arbitrary and obtuse.

Look man. All I want is an old school keyboard smiley face. Is that too much to ask?

[rpjazzguitar]

Yeah I just use ‘m6’ for melodic minor because it ties it to the chord symbol then. Nice and easy.

m7b6 or m7b13 for Natural minor. People make this equation anyway in chord scale theory. It’s to get rid of the scale name and unite it with the chord right away.

or you could have your nine note scale and focus on how the individual notes within it actually sound.

So, trying to think through chord names (following your lead here).

b6 b7 Cm7b13 (or does that imply a 9th and 11th?)
6 b7 Cm13 or, perhaps more specifically Cm7 add6
b6 7 Cminmaj7b6 or Cm^7b6
6 7 Cminmaj7 add 6.

I think I'd prefer Cmb6b7, Cm6b7, Cmb67, Cm67. Of course, you can also have Dbm6b7 etc which starts getting a little cumbersome to read. Maybe Dbm(b6b7) -- the parentheses help.

Not so distant from the way Brazilians notate sus chords C4/7 for example.

[Christian Miller]

Look man. All I want is an old school keyboard smiley face. Is that too much to ask?

:-(

[Christian Miller]

So, trying to think through chord names (following your lead here).

b6 b7 Cm7b13 (or does that imply a 9th and 11th?)
6 b7 Cm13 or, perhaps more specifically Cm7 add6
b6 7 Cminmaj7b6 or Cm^7b6
6 7 Cminmaj7 add 6.

I think I'd prefer Cmb6b7, Cm6b7, Cmb67, Cm67. Of course, you can also have Dbm6b7 etc which starts getting a little cumbersome to read. Maybe Dbm(b6b7) -- the parentheses help.

Not so distant from the way Brazilians notate sus chords C4/7 for example.

Everything is like major scale unless otherwise specified.

Keeps it nice and simple.

Melodic minor - m6 or m(maj7) - b3
Dorian - m7 - b3 and b7
Aeolian - m7(b13) or m7b6 - b3, b6 and b7
Phrygian - m7(b9b13) or more likely 7sus4b9b13
IF we assume minor goes on sus (which it doesn’t but …. theory …)
Dorian b2 - 13sus4b9 or for that matter just 7sus4b9

So this maps in an uncomplicated way to the most common chord scale applications for major, minor and dominant. Dominant scale is called just that, which is what Barry already did, sometimes calling it for example the C7 scale.

This shouldn’t be surprising because chords symbols already mostly function this way. Including Brazilian ones. (Sometimes there is a little short hand. And there’s the business with the 7th.)

in practice there are other factors like what’s diatonic to prevalent key and so on.

(Also doesn’t work for half dim chords.)

it doesn’t of course matter because no one cares what I think, but I do think you get a bit of an insight into a good way to teach chord scales.

one thing my system doesn’t include is a system of modes (or ‘derivative scales to use Mick Goodrick’s term), but you can do the same thing with chord subs.

Saying you can get G7alt with an Abm(maj7) is the exact same thing as saying G altered is Ab melodic minor for example. The scalic implications are baked into the chord symbols. Saves bloody time. Nice concise notation.

Again this mirrors Barry’s teaching quite a bit. Important minor, tritones minor etc.

Shame about the diminished and half dims tho. Ah just covert them into dominant and minor chords… Bm7b5 = G7 or Dm6, Bo = G7b9. Works great then.

[pamosmusic]

:-(

Again. You’re a sociopath.

[Christian Miller]

Again. You’re a sociopath.

Just you wait till I decide to decimalise time and introduce all who disagree to Madame Guillotine.

[Reg]

I have to ask.

Why does Reg say it and earn a smile face when a whole thread full of people have been saying it all day and it gets called “academic BS”

I must say. I’m feeling a bit put out.

Where’s my cordial smiley face?

Hey Pete.... who cares right. I'm not really sure I understand how you musically organize how you use Minor(s).

And generally... when I'm talking about tunes, I'm using Functional types of harmonic references. Not contrapuntal adjustments of scales. I'm usually thinking and hearing Complete pictures. When I use Nat. Minor or A tune is is using Nat. Minor as a Tonic or Tonal Reference..... That becomes the starting Reference for how I play a tune.

Maybe... when I solo... I hear a chord for every note or lick. I generally don't embellish melodically and try and use or think Harmonic labels after the Fact.... I hear harmonically or embellish (with functional organization), and my melodic playing reflects that.

Ex. I think you were posting some noodling on a min I V vamp... with recordame reference and playing using MM reference. So I would hear a chord pattern that expands that vamp. Basically more chords and a longer vamp that has organized harmonic movement, which has complete target tonal references...

Here's a simple version on accoustic.... for example

[pamosmusic]

Just you wait till I decide to decimalise time and introduce all who disagree to Madame Guillotine.

Cult of the Supreme Being, wherein the supreme being is just Barry Harris.

[pamosmusic]

Hey Pete.... who cares right. I'm not really sure I understand how you musically organize how you use Minor(s).

Well I suppose that makes two of us.

Ex. I think you were posting some noodling on a min I V vamp... with recordame reference and playing using MM reference. So I would hear a chord pattern that expands that vamp.

And I don’t think I recall posting this? I’ve posted plenty of noodling. No Recordame that I recall. Unless perhaps the reference was subconscious.

EDIT: though I very much appreciate the smiley.

[Christian Miller]

Cult of the Supreme Being, wherein the supreme being is just Barry Harris.

I did not become an iconoclast to erect new idols.

I became an iconoclast because I like smashing stuff up.

Right I’m off to get between 20,000 and 30,000 seconds of sleep before continuing with my work.

[Christian Miller]

Not gonna tune my guitar in fourths though. That’s for NERDS.

[pamosmusic]

Not gonna tune my guitar in fourths though. That’s for NERDS.

Yeah you always struck me as more of a “just intonation” kind of bro, anyway.

[pcjazz]

Jeez guys, get a room.

[pamosmusic]

Maybe... when I solo... I hear a chord for every note or lick. I generally don't embellish melodically and try and use or think Harmonic labels after the Fact.... I hear harmonically or embellish (with functional organization), and my melodic playing reflects that.

Can elaborate on this or point to it in your video? I’m mostly hearing sixteenth note stepwise scale vocabulary. Some eighth notes that sound essentially Dorian, which would be fairly typical for the tune.

Can you explain what you mean with different chords for every note or lick? Not sure I’m picking up what you’re putting down.

[Reg]

yea... maybe some one can post examples of guitarists that actually use BH as an approach to play.... you know, like regular gigs... Just simple playing live at gigs or where ever... What world are we talking about...

yea Christian.... 50 years ago everything was related too and the RNs and analysis would reflect that.... but modal concepts and organizations of what is the Tonic have changed. But I also tend to just label as musically organized Harmonic embellishments.... that have specific references and the analysis reflects that. It'd not one bag fits it all... BH is old school. Not bad or wrong.... just not that usable playing. You ever play with pianist who try and force the approach. I have, many times...It's a very muddy vanilla.

The other thing about guitarists... who wants or hires a guitarist to take solos.... I mean come on... most would hire a sax, tpt. etc.... Most of my gigs and the guitarist I know and rhythm sections I work with... get hired because we can comp and set the musical table reliably. We make musicians sound .... better. Not because we can shred etc...

Not trying to dish or badmouth anyone... We all love jazz. Just trying to say how I've seen it for years. There are lots of great players out there....

It's just something to think about.

[pamosmusic]

yea... maybe some one can post examples of guitarists that actually use BH as an approach to play.... you know, like regular gigs... Just simple playing live at gigs or where ever... What world are we talking about...

I mean, sure. Here’s one. Just some shmuck.

Some killer tonic minor playing to boot.

Pasquale landed in New York like a bomb went off. Great player. Swings like crazy. Huge rep of tunes. Barry disciple too. To be fair, his technique is extraordinary and he can certainly pull Barry’s stuff off more convincingly than your average, but yeah.

[Reg]

Can elaborate on this or point to it in your video? I’m mostly hearing sixteenth note stepwise scale vocabulary. Some eighth notes that sound essentially Dorian, which would be fairly typical for the tune.

Can you explain what you mean with different chords for every note or lick? Not sure I’m picking up what you’re putting down.

Sure... simple example could be.... On A-7 which I'm labeling as Dorian reference.

So maybe the 5th lick, I might hear A-7 to Cma9 ... D9#11... then A-9 E7#9... D13sus D9#11

Man you might want to slow it down.... there is lots of scale wise 16ths... but there is also lots of non scale wise material. Sometimes we hear what we want...LOL

Yea It was Peter C... not you, sorry I'm not really sure I know who you are or your playing... my bad.

Yea Emmet's hang is cool... been checking out since covid etc...and always love Pasquale's playing...generally great.... but that was just old school harmony... and Pasquale never comped.... His licks were straight ... minus any blues references. Lots of players have great chops... I have my moments, but not many guitarist can comp that great using BH.

yea I've checked out most of Emmet's vids and have posted some.... we're lucky to be able to watch. But where is the BH.

[Reg]

I'll try and post more stuff.... comping organizational concepts etc... I'm off to work... LOL.