-
I think it's ambiguous because the Bb only occurs over the G7. But there are no natural A's, are there?
Get out of that!
-
09-10-2023 07:04 AM
-
Originally Posted by alez
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Originally Posted by djg
But let's not take it out of context, he's made it very clear that the sentence is not a rule set in stone but much the opposite.
-
Sorry, I'm not alez.
Whether it's good or bad is a subjective view. The fact is that, yes, making a solid D minor into a Dm7 does soften it a bit. On the other hand, that's what makes the jazz sound what it is. Otherwise we're back into vanilla sounds and that's not the point at all.
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
I think I would need to see explicitly that there’s a flat 7, otherwise I’m probably going to either avoid it in favor of the 6 or play a natural 7 in scalar kind of stuff.
Melodic minor would be equally common. Thinking of the last couple bars of the A sections in Autumn Leaves as an example.
For instance soloing on a chord is kind of different to writing a melody. If in doubt, study the song.
My lack of patience with theory and scale talk… it all depends on what you are doing.
It’s all relative to how you hear music. But it can’t be based on rules because not all the players follow the rules.
No matter what they’re listening too, what people want from music is “intentionality.”
If it says m7 on the lead sheet, play it.
That makes you an interesting fellow.
Maybe even a silly goose.
-
Originally Posted by alez
Guitar is like driving a car. Do you drive? Can you learn how to negotiate the roads from a book? It's impossible, you need to get out there and learn as you go. The more experience you have the better you get. Same with guitar.
I'm not saying the book has no place either. Of course it has, but the practical is far more important.
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
You clearly don’t know this tune?
-
Originally Posted by pamosmusic
-
Originally Posted by alez
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
You didn’t seem to understand the question.
You didn’t seem to have fully read the answers.**
You didn’t seem to know the tune about which you were pronouncing.
You were patronizing the guy who was asking.
** some evidence of this to be seen in the fact that, following the “lol” you quoted, was a list of instances where other people were saying all the stuff you’re saying you were waiting for someone to say. Which you neglected to quote.
This all adds up to silliness.
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
A thread like this can give you useful pointers to try out. Less beating around the bush. Having both is very valuable to me.
Originally Posted by pcjazz
Let me rephrase. Where I wrote "if the chart says[...]", I could've written "if the comping guy is playing[...]". And I'd be soloing over that comping.
-
Originally Posted by alez
How much of your playing are you recording? You should absolutely, definitely, record it - against a backing track so both are audible. Then you'll know.
If it obviously clashes, find out where and why and change it. Progress guaranteed :-)
-
Originally Posted by djg
-
Originally Posted by alez
I had to unlearn playing m7 on minor to play the styles of music I needed to play. But if you just play 60s style hard bop or something you might not see a distinction. It all depends on who you listen and what you like.
check out Nica’s Dream for further info.
-
Mark Levine says in his theory book that harmonic minor is rarely used in jazz. For a while I thought this was a strange thing to say as harmonic minor as chord scale over dominants (ie Phrygian dominant) is used a lot in jazz. But I realized later that he probably means that the use of harmonic minor as the chord scale for tonic minor is rare. Now that makes sense.
Last edited by Tal_175; 09-10-2023 at 10:38 AM.
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
I honestly think it’s still kind of weird, even though you’re probably right about what he meant. I mean … it’s also not uncommon over a dominant chord, though often enough with some modification to smooth over that awkward big second.
I think that’s kind of the tricky thing about theory projects like Levine’s. I like the book but some things have so many caveats attached, you kind of have to wonder.
-
I remember the musical examples being the coolest part of that book but I also remember probably half of them being Mulgrew Miller. And Mulgrew Miller is the bomb, but that kind of goes to Christian’s point. That’s probably just who Levine was into and how he processes harmony. If half the examples had been Monk, or Herbie, or Barry or something, the rules of theory would’ve had to be different.
ARRANGING PROFESSORS: Don’t harmonize your melody in seconds.
Thelonious Monk: lol.
So no book like that can really be definitive except in a narrow kind of way.
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
Originally Posted by djg
I’m haven’t transcribed the the IJG version, but it sounds like he’s staying on a more ‘tonic minor’/m6 tonality on that one from a quick re listen.
Given incredible jazz guitar was recorded in 1960 and Smokin’ in 1965… it’s perhaps to be expected historicallly?
i think a distinction has also to be made for real minor tonics (blue bossa, airegin, bebop, etc) vs tonicized II chords (honeysuckle rose, speak low, tear it down).
The iim7 is often treated as a minor tonic by soloists whatever’s in the original changes?
-
Originally Posted by djg
So true minor to me is less a matter of this or that scale and more a matter of emphasis. As you say 7 goes up, b7 goes down. It’s a bit like the melodic minor or some Arabic Maqams, Indian raags and so on with an ascending and descending form. You even see it in Miles’s so what solo.
To me the most Dorian to ever have dorianed comes from Wes’s explicit use of the m13 arpeggio in the first chorus of the 65 4on6 recording….
he definitely went more "dorian" over the years as the evolution of tunes like "jingles" show. he also added impressions to his set list.
However given Django et al seem to be using that sound in the early 30s, there seems more to it. I’d love to learn more of how m6 went from being a subdominant sound to a tonic one even as the story of how the b7 because accepted on minor seems quite clear…
And then that sort of weird blurred line between the minor and dominant realms. It’s an interesting one…
-
Yea... generally we're living.... like now, or at least the last 40 years when playing jazz.
The more important point might be.... be musically organized with whatever you choose to play.
It's really gets muddy, boring and I could go on... but the point is at some point one should be able hear and understand the differences between using different MINOR references.
What you play....what Minor you choose to use... has harmonic and melodic implications.
It's not always about what...YOU feel, hear etc.... There are very standard common practice harmonic/melodic usages.
Most old standards use Nat. or Aeolian Min. as Reference. Which generally implies use of Harmonic Min. as harmonic and melodic pathway for helping to create Dominant Cadence. The V7 to I- . And also implies use of Borrowing and embellishment as musical organization for expanding.... How a harmonic or melodic "Reference" is musically Developed using musical Relationships. (this is how I was taught and played as kid.. 60's and early 70's.)
For the last 50 years... Dorian has also become common reference as a I-7 chord. Which has made common practice, the use of Dorian and Melodic Min. as another pathway for creating Dominant cadence as well as Dom. resolution and expanding Sub-Dom. resolutions, and framing of Blue Notes and Modal Concepts.
The last 20 years as opened even more doors for understanding possible usages of musical organization.
What has become standard is not to mix and match....
So for a possible example... using Blue Bossa.... You need to start with an analysis, or at least decide on the basic musical organization from where to start from... The basic Reference. That doesn't mean you can't mix and match or use embellishment etc... but it's done with understanding of what your implying.
What that means is.... your deciding on what Harmonic and melodic organizations your going to use, create relationships with and develop etc.... And where..... in the Form of the Tune etc...
So if from your analysis, someone else's analogy... verbal discussion or however you decide how to approach playing a tune, even if you don't go through this approach..... when you play....players like ME, and I'm just an average working jazz player will know from what you play... what your implying and want to go musically. So from that moment and next time through the tune.... we'll know how to also expand what we're playing and all be on the same musical page together during our interactions and reactions... playing jazz.
So example... Blue Bossa.... if your calling C- as implied in melody, the Relative Min. of Key of Eb..... Nat. min. Aeolian etc... You would be implying a simplified Analysis of A B form 8+8
ll Cmin l Cmin l F- .... l F- ... l G7 l G7 l Cmin l Cmin l ( I- , IV- ,V7 , I-)
l Ab7 l Ab7 l Dbma7 l Dbma7 l G7 l G7 l Cmin l Cmin ll ( bVI7 , bIIma , V7 , I- )
There are other analysis ... I'm it keeping simple and leaving out the implied related II-'s of the V chords.
This would be old school .... and still kicks ass. As long as you can play LOL.
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 ...
and I even play D7alt to G7alt to C-7 for turnaround. I like playing Chord Patterns ( series of chords used to imply a Tonal target )
Part of creating relationships and expanding harmonic as well as melodic possibilities. It's like embellishment but with modal organization. I gotta go... I'll expand more later...
Reg
-
To get a bit granular, a hand out I was preparing for a vid I didn't get around to.. I might do it now, much of the work has been done
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
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.
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.
Not that this is really different, but the internal math strikes me as easier.
Getting hung up on rhythms when transcribing
Today, 11:59 AM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading