-
I want to practice modes (major scale and melodic minor) on a piece by larry carlton called 'room 335' (at a slower tempo though). Theres a few places I am stuck and they occur more than once:
- there is a bar of Dmaj7 to C#m7(#5). I play lydian over the D but what scale can I play over the C#m7(#5)? I assume there is no scale that allows me to play over both?
- I have a bar of Bm7 for 3 beats and then Bbm7 as a passing chord for one beat. Not sure how to handle this.
- I have a bar of Bm7 to Amaj7 then to Eb9 as a passing chord. I can play B dorian over the first two but confused on what to play over the passing chord?
- I have a bar of Dmaj7 to D#m7b5 to E7(sus4). Not sure how to handle this either.
any advice would be great. thanks.
-
05-12-2010 08:50 AM
-
In general, I would start with playing arpeggios, not modey scales.
As for passing chords, ignore them. Or take a breath and don't play over them. Or do the opposite and emphasize them by playing their 3rd or 7th. Because they go by so quickly, I don't feel bad if I figure out a few licks that nail them.
-
The changes for Room 335 is discussed earlier: https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/compi...oom-335-a.html
The tune does not look modal to me!
-
thanks for the quick replies. My teacher has asked me to play modally over it as an exercise. The C#-7(#5) has really got me stuck.
-
If you're doing it "by the book", what modey scale do you play over a m7b5? Play that scale.
Originally Posted by anth202
EDIT: my mistake. My eyeballs saw "b5", not "#5".Last edited by BigDaddyLoveHandles; 05-12-2010 at 12:45 PM.
-
If your teacher tells you to play modally over a functional tune, get a new teacher Originally Posted by anth202
-
D F# A C#
C# E A B
Both derived from an A major scale
Passing chords can be ignored or addressed with a few notes (probably chord tones)
I don't know the song so I don't want to comment further out of context.
Check out what sets of notes the melody plays against these chords. That's always a good place to start.
-
C#min7(#5) is an Amaj7 chord with the 3rd in the bass.
For the Bbmin7..... move down a halfstep.
This tune is not modal.
-
Excuse my ignorance but, what's wrong with using modes over standard changes? Whenever this topic is mentioned there's always some back and forth. I often use modes in rock songs which aren't modal and it sounds ok to me, never tried over jazz tunes though. Originally Posted by gersdal
If your teacher tells you to play modally over a functional tune, get a new teacher
-
Pedagogically, it can lead a newbie into improvisations that sound like you are merely playing scales. That doesn't sound jazzy. Starting out with arpeggios gets you to nail the chord tones right away, and sounds jazzier. Then you naturally add passing and "in between" notes. Originally Posted by saponsky
-
Maybe his teacher is trying to make the point of why thinking in scales for every chord change is such a difficult way to approach improvisation.
I think that if you are sticking to pure modes, though, then the advice to ignore the passing chords is good. If you ignore a passing chord and are still playing in the mode/scale for the previous chord, usually you pick up a chromatic tension over it which ends up sounding good anyway and it just sounds like you played a chromatic connection note on your way to resolving into the next chord.
But that's why I prefer not to be constrained by scales (I understand that your teacher is insisting on it), because I generally play through the passing chords and you need to be able to visualize and play with the intervals of that chord. I do this because I generally like to emphasize the passing chord. I am a huge fan of them and I think that chromatic movements within a progression like that really make it sound hip. In my chord melodies, I'm usually proudest of my work with passing chords. I spend most of my time figuring how to make those work. Sometimes I over do it...
-
Ohh I get, tanx.
-
I'm talking about what a teacher should teach, not how you prefer to think. I'm totally ok with whatever you think as long as you sound cool Originally Posted by saponsky
But for the theoretical bit: Say you are playing a solo over Stairway to heaven. If I remember correctly the chord progression for the solo part is Am - G - F - G x lot of times. Would you be soling in:
1) A minor?
2) A aeolian mode?
3) A aeolian mode over the Am, G mixolydian mode over the G, and F lydian mode over the F?
They all sound ok because they are all soloing with the tones A-B-C-D-E-F-G. The theory gets unnecessary complicated in the 3'rd option, tho, and not theoretical correct.
Bert Ligon “Jazz Theory Resources”, Houston Publishing on "When is it modal and when is it functional harmony?":I would say that the Stairway to heaven is clearly functional, and should theoretically be treated as functional. Hence answer no 1 is in my opinion correct. I guess you could argue that this example is a aeolian vamp, and that my second proposal for answer could be the right one also be accepted, but why blurry an easy thing with difficulties when they are not needed.A piece that begins with the progression Dm7 – G7 –C is in the key of no sharps and flats. It cannot be D dorian as C is the tonic indicated by the traditional harmonic progression. It is terribly misleading when the Dm7 is labeled as dorian. D dorian indicates D is the tonic and D would never sound like the tonic in this setting. The proof is in the hearing… The tonic is the primary pitch; there cannot be two primary pitches. Labeling the passage as D dorian, G mixolydian followed by C Ionian produces more confusion. Does anyone hear this passage with three different tonics? C is the tonic, and clearly the passage reflects the major/minor system with the functional ii7 - V7 – I progression. Using the same logic, it would be misleading to suggest that a modal piece in D dorian is really in the key of C, with just the ii7 chord sounding.
However, in contemporary compositions that have mixtures of modal and functional harmony, it is helpful to describe certain chords and sounds by their modal names so that an Fmaj7 (IV) may be described as a Lydian sound to distinguish it from a major scale sound (I).
How is music in ionian mode different from music in a major key, or music in aeolian different from music in a minor key? Music in the major/minor system implies functional harmony based on the tertian triads, and so requires the leading tone added to the minor scale changing it to harmonic minor. While there may be chords in modal music, there is no codified system of chordal progression, no functional harmonic relationship, and no patterns of modulation. Modal music might never modulate, beginning and ending in the same mode.
Also: Please note the " " in the end of my sentence
-
A more extensive reply that may be of interest is given in an other forum:
Originally Posted by JonR
... it's useful to try and differentiate two different kinds of music, distinguished (mainly) by how chords are used.
Type 1 - the most familiar to fans of classical, jazz standards (pre-1960) and pop - is "functional harmony".
This is music that is written in a major or minor key (or sometimes both alternately); uses chords built in 3rds (1-3-5-7 etc, known as "tertian" harmony); and strings those chords together in "progressions" with a kind of narrative logic or momentum - chords clearly "leading" from one to the next, with the expectation - after various excursions through dissonance - of finally arriving at the "tonic" (I chord).
Type 2 - "modal harmony".
This is typified by early "modal jazz", and has a lot in common with Indian raga, and various other kinds of ethnic music. Rock music also uses many of its qualities, although often not strictly applied. (One of the problems in analysing rock is the way it combines elements of both these approaches to harmony - as does most contemporary jazz.)
As Chris says, an archetypal example of this kind of music is Miles Davis "So What", on his seminal "Kind of Blue" album. It consists of one chord held for 16 bars, then another a half-step up for 8 bars, then the first chord again for another 8 bars. Except it isn't really a "chord" in the sense of a fixed stack of notes. The main mode is D dorian (with the bridge in Eb dorian), and the chords played (by pianist Bill Evans) are various collections of notes from the scale - most commonly stacked in 4ths and 2nds rather than the 3rds of "functional" harmony. We tend to call these chords "sus" chords of various kinds - but that's borrowing from the language of tertian chord terminology.
(There are examples of classical music with a similar feel, such as Ravel's "Bolero", although describing them as "modal" would not be strictly correct in classical terms. True modal music is the stuff that preceded key-based classical music, in the middle ages, and had different rules. IOW, when we use "modal" to talk about jazz or rock - or any one-chord groove-based music, we need to understand it's really a misnomer. "Impressionist" would be a better word - but "modal" is what we're stuck with!)
Modal music of this "pure" kind (in the modern "impressionist" sense) has a clearly different mood and feel from functional harmonic progressions. It sounds "cool", or "introspective", with a "groove" or "drone". Think of Indian ragas, which focus on a single mood, and explore it for several minutes. Or of Scots bagpipe music, where the instrument itself sets up its own drone. There is no "progression" in this music; the harmony is "static". The movement is all in the melody and rhythm.
Chords in this kind of music (if there are chords at all) don't have "functions" - in terms of jobs to do in making a progression move forward - because there is no progression! Chords really have no job at all, other than to pick out various notes in the mode for colour.
....
So the point here - in learning how modes are "applied" - is to first identify what kind of music it is you are hearing. Is it modal music? Or is it in a key?
With rock, this question is often impossible to answer, other than by saying "a bit of both".
Take a classic and influential pop song: Martha and the Vandellas "Dancing in the Street", dating from a time (1964) when "rock" music (as we know it) was barely a gleam in Keith Richards' eye....
It begins with a long vamp on one chord, a repeated horn riff giving way to a vocal verse on the same chord. The writers (William Stevenson and Martin Gaye) probably wouldn't thought of it this way, but it is an example of "mixolydian mode": a major chord, with a clear flattened 7th in the riff and vocal melody. Although it's clearly the key chord (tonic), it's not a major key (because that would require a major 7th).
The other thing that makes it "modal" is simply the fact that the chord doesn't change - for a long time. It's happy to just groove along on that one (E7).
Eventually, tho, it gives way to a sequence of other chords. To begin with ("all we need is music") it moves to A - and this could be interpreted in two ways: the IV of E mixolydian mode; or maybe that E7 was the V of A major all along, just waiting for its tonic? (If you were really wedded to major key theory, and knew nothing of modes, that's probably how you'd see it.)
The next chord sequence, however, finally confirms E as key centre: G#7 (V/vi) - C#m (vi) - F#7 (V/V) - F#m7 (ii) - B7 (V). That's a classic progression in E major: although it contains two secondary dominants (G#7, F#7), it leads back inexorably to that mixolydian E7 chord of the verse.
This became a common template for rock music: mixolydian groove for the verse (often with a repeated riff), major key progression for the chorus. The advantage of this "one-two, left-right" punch is that you get a danceable, hypnotic groove for the verse, to get you on your feet, then you get a singalong hook for the chorus (because key-based sequences are a good basis for hook melodic phrases). The Beatles did this kind of thing time and again; Lennon and Harrison were both devotees of mixolydian mode (tho they didn't know it had a name of course), while McCartney was more fond of old-fashioned key harmony.
The classic mixolydian rock song is "Gloria" - consisting of only one chord (E) or rather a riff including passing D and A chords. Another is "All Right Now" (Free), in A mixolydian (chord riff includes G and D).
But many others have a strong mixolydian flavour, before bringing in chords from the parallel major key: such as "Hard Days Night", "Satisfaction", "Sympathy for the Devil" and "Sweet Child o' Mine".
Theorist Alan Pollack has coined the phrase "mixolydian major" to describe this common mode-key mixture (neither one nor the other, but both).
....
IOW, when we think of "D dorian mode", associating it with C major is potentially misleading. You can derive it that way (as Chris says), but the way it works (as he also says! ) is as a kind of D minor scale.
The common confusion is to think we need to "apply" or "use" D dorian mode when we see a Dm chord in a C major key progression. We don't. In that context, Dm is merely the ii chord in C ionian mode. (Ionian mode being essentially the same thing as the major key.) The scale is C major; the tonic is C; the chord doesn't last long enough to have a "D dorian" sound.
But if we have a piece of music based wholly or mainly on a Dm chord, then D dorian mode may be an option (alongside either D aeolian or - less likely - D phrygian). I say "may" be an option because most likely the mode will be established by the melody, or chord voicings used.
Eg, in Miles "So What", D aeolian and phrygian would probably sound wrong, but more importantly would be beside the point. The tune is written in D dorian mode. To say it's "in key of D minor" is not quite right - unless you say "in key of D, dorian mode" (dorian mode on a D keynote). To say it's "in key of C major" (because it uses all the white notes) is quite wrong!
-
Perhaps your teacher is refering to what I'll call the "other way of thinking modally".
I my theory class we were told to write tunes using a certain mode, using the harmonized scale of that mode for your chords and modal cadences for your cadences. This is what I'm referring too as the "other way of thinking modally".
Room 335
||: Dmaj7 C#m7#5 | Bm7 Amaj7 | Bm7 C#m7 | Bm7 Amaj7 Eb9#11 :||
To me that's a D lydian chord progression but I'd be just as comfortable calling it A Ionian. It's kind of ambiguious but I'm going with D lydian.
No worry though as D lydian has the same notes as A Ionian.
I think it's silly to use the traditional modal approach for this tune by saying, "I'm going to play D lydian over the Dmaj7 and C# phyrgian over the C#m7#5 and B dorian over Bm7 etc". Just consider D the tonal center of this part of the progression and consider that your playing D lydian the whole time or consider A the tonal center and that you're playing A Ionian the whole time. In other words this progression was written in D lydian (or A Ionian - like I said it's an ambiguious progression).
Check out the melody... that's how the melody is played. The whole first two phrases are in one of those modes (D lydian or A Ionian pick one) except for one quick C natural bluesey sounding note. And observe that he spells both an A major arpeggio ascending and a D major arpeggio descending as part of the melody.
The Eb9#11... is not part of the key, but is a dominant sound for the Dmaj which is why I hear that D is the tonal center of this part of the progression. Larry doesn't always address this chord in his melody or solo but when he does I believe it's with chord tones not with a scale. But if you want to address that chord with a mode then Eb lydian dominant is the mode that would work.
As I recall it goes to a similar progression in F (instead of D) next. Use the same approach for that section, i.e. F lydian.Last edited by fep; 05-12-2010 at 08:16 PM.
-
Well said, fep.
-
Why are we calling b13, #5 in C# phrigian? Nice info. Fep. Maybe gersdal's teach want him to be aware of each mode's characteristic notes and resolutions... maybe not... again, nice explanation Fep... Best Reg
-
I think that by calling it a #5 rather than a b13 eliminates the possibility of someone adding the 9 and or 11. Originally Posted by Reg
To me C#mi7b13 implies that it 'could' have either or both (1 3 5 7 9 11 b13) This might also open it up for you to start thinking abour slash chord
D/C#m7
C#mi7#5 is plain old 1 3 #5 b7
Great sub for a sus 2 chord though (Asus2/C#)
-
I agree that C#m7(add b13) would be better. I'm hearing it as the natural 5 (G#) in the bass is the correct note for the bass player. Originally Posted by Reg
-
This^^^^+1^^^^ Originally Posted by fep
"Modal" is a description of a specific theory construct...but it is also an approach as described here....
Reply With Quote
Grant Green, What is This Thing
Today, 01:59 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading