i know the topic of jazz soloing with the DB or any instrument for that matter, is massively complicated. coming from a rock/blues background i'm used to the whole "play an a minor scale over a song in a minor" which clearly doesnt work for most jazz standards because of shifting keys. a lot of bassists will stress that you should forget about scales and focus on playing the chords and chordal substitutes, so in autumn leaves, focus on playing the notes forming the Am7 chord, D7 chord, G7 chord, etc etc. I guess my massive problem with this (at least as a beginner soloist), is that 1 measure per chord seems incredibly fast to develop anything meaningful solo wise, it's almost like i can play a few notes, like walk into the 3rd or 5th and then poof another chord and whatever i was developing i need to shift somewhere else. i must be going about this the wrong way. can anyone please give me some guidance on developing fine jazz soloing for the 1-chord-per-measure standards? thanks!

Check out that idiot Peter Dalla's recommended approach for learning standards/practicing in the thread WALKING AND SOLOING AND PRACTICING, as well as any number of threads available in the locked threads at the beginning of the THEORY forum.

Lots of good stuff, there's a variety of approach that has served any number of good players well. Check out what's already available at the site and if it raises a question or questions, post them in the thread that seems most relevant and it will become "live" again and we can take it from the top of the chorus.
And not have to retype some stuff ad infinitum.

If it will fit the chord progression, you can start with restating the melody line as you begin your solo.

Another trick: wiggle your fingers around like a maniac and afterwards drop hints about the "secret message" buried under all the dissonance and passing tones.

If it will fit the chord progression, you can start with restating the melody line as you begin your solo.

Another trick: wiggle your fingers around like a maniac and afterwards drop hints about the "secret message" buried under all the dissonance and passing tones.


I'm sure your mother finds you charming...

I'm sure your mother finds you charming...
Well, my mother would quickly recommend the first option before punishing me, if you mean to assume anything of her.

i know the topic of jazz soloing with the DB or any instrument for that matter, is massively complicated. coming from a rock/blues background i'm used to the whole "play an a minor scale over a song in a minor" which clearly doesnt work for most jazz standards because of shifting keys.


I'm not sure that approach works anywhere - even the Blues changes key and just because a note is in a particular key doesn't mean it will sound good against any chord in that key and it certaily may not be the best choice!!


a lot of bassists will stress that you should forget about scales and focus on playing the chords and chordal substitutes, so in autumn leaves, focus on playing the notes forming the Am7 chord, D7 chord, G7 chord, etc etc.


I don't think this is "forgetting about scales" - but rather concentrating on chords. So if you add all the possible extensions to a chord, it is functionally identical to a scale - the important thing is knowing what scales are available to you over any combination of chords!




I guess my massive problem with this (at least as a beginner soloist), is that 1 measure per chord seems incredibly fast to develop anything meaningful solo wise, it's almost like i can play a few notes, like walk into the 3rd or 5th and then poof another chord and whatever i was developing i need to shift somewhere else. i must be going about this the wrong way. can anyone please give me some guidance on developing fine jazz soloing for the 1-chord-per-measure standards? thanks!

See Ed's advice and practice, practice, practice!!

"the important thing is knowing what scales are available to you over any combination of chords!"

ok here we go! this is exactly what i need to hear. for example, I have been told that from a ii to a V (like the am7 to d7 in autumn leaves), you can play the notes that comprise the ii throughout both measures. first off, is this correct? secondly, could someone explain some of the logic behind this? and finally, is there some simple formula for knowing what these magic chords are available when playing over a combination of chords (book? chart? anything?)

Thanks!

"the important thing is knowing what scales are available to you over any combination of chords!"

ok here we go! this is exactly what i need to hear. for example, I have been told that from a ii to a V (like the am7 to d7 in autumn leaves), you can play the notes that comprise the ii throughout both measures. first off, is this correct? secondly, could someone explain some of the logic behind this? and finally, is there some simple formula for knowing what these magic chords are available when playing over a combination of chords (book? chart? anything?)

Thanks!


JUST ... SAY....NO to chord scales. No there is not a simple formula, if it were easy everybody would do it. Look at the function of what you are talking about
ii chord - C Eb G Bb
V chord - F A C Eb
I chord - Bb D F A

every one of those chords is built diatonically off of the major tonic so, if all you are doing is plugging in notes from the scale, you can play the Bb major scale all day long, right? But you do hear enough to understand that that's NOT what Cannonball is doing on SOMETHIN ELSE, right?

Stop, just stop right NOW. And read through the threads, I swear to gawd every single concern you have brought up has been addressed in there. You will be able to ask more focused questions and we will be able to better advise you ONCE YOU DO THAT.


ROGER THE BRUCE - I'm surprised at you. After all we been through....

JUST ... SAY....NO to chord scales.

Wait a sec, I thought this thread was about beginning jazz soloing. For a beginner motivated to learn jazz after getting bored with a ripe pile of rock and roll root/5 chords and minor pentatonic solos, going after all those 7th chord scales and memorizing the sound of the intervals isn't a bad place to start at all.

I'd leave the harmonic analysis homework on the carrot stick for a little while longer.

Wait a sec, I thought this thread was about beginning jazz soloing. For a beginner motivated to learn jazz after getting bored with a ripe pile of rock and roll root/5 chords and minor pentatonic solos, going after all those 7th chord scales and memorizing the sound of the intervals isn't a bad place to start at all.

I'd leave the harmonic analysis homework on the carrot stick for a little while longer.

Feel free to.

ROGER THE BRUCE - I'm surprised at you. After all we been through....


So - what was wrong with what I actually said - not being sarcastic or anything I want to know!! ?? :confused:

So - a major part of my regular Jazz classes, has been going through tunes and seeing what scales you could use over which chords in particular situations - it may only be for one bar, but it is worth knowing that a diminished scale will work here or a harmonic minor there etc. etc .

This was a major revelation for me, as my teacher suggested scale choices that I would never have thought of, from just listening to the tune - for me it was how to get solos sounding "Jazzy" rather than just a random collection of improvised notes.

[I've been] seeing what scales you could use over which chords in particular situations . . . it is worth knowing that a diminished scale will work here or a harmonic minor there etc. etc. This was a major revelation for me . . . I would never have thought of, from just listening to the tune - for me it was how to get solos sounding "Jazzy" rather than just a random collection of improvised notes.

This comment really bears a detailed response, because there are a lot of dangerous seeds planted inside.

It is easy for someone to tell you what notes to play over particular chords. It's quite cost-effective. Students leave satisfied, describing their solos as "sounding jazzy" instead of "random."

But there is a fundamental distinction between playing jazz and sounding as if you're playing jazz. Jazz is about listening, taking risks and bringing passion to the moment. It's about that for beginners and for masters alike. Having someone tell you what notes to put where is a shortcut for listening to the music, to your mentors and to your colleagues and actually hearing what notes call to you.

To cite an example you allude to: Perhaps your teacher told you how to use a diminished scale over a dominant seventh change. It's cool; you try it; it works; you've now got a deeper box of licks with which to ambush the next unsuspecting dominant chord that happens into your path. Five years from now you're listening to Bird fly off down that path, or Joe Pass work a chord solo, and the actual sound makes intuitive sense. You've been "sounding jazzy" instead of playing jazz.

There's nothing wrong with taking a shortcut. If your playing was truly "random" then it's probably a big help. But if you don't go back and do the work, you will always be thinking about what piece of noise you should paste into a point in time, instead of listening to find a musical response to that moment's environment.

And yes, I've got a long way to go before I get there, too.

Well,
me, myself and I think that analyzing different scale choices over the changes is best applied when you learn a new tune.
THERE you can try different scales to sound more "jazzy" or whatever.
Without knowing the tune, there´s no story to tell. Without a story the solo will be a random collection of improvised notes anyhow.
Knowing the scales will help to invent something to say, but
your story has to be already lurking inside your head, waiting for it´s chance to flow out.

R2

Sam, seems we were typing at the same moment, the same thing.
:D
R2

Well,
me, myself and I think that analyzing different scale choices over the changes is best applied when you learn a new tune.
THERE you can try different scales to sound more "jazzy" or whatever.
Without knowing the tune, there´s no story to tell. Without a story the solo will be a random collection of improvised notes anyhow.
Knowing the scales will help to invent something to say, but
your story has to be already lurking inside your head, waiting for it´s chance to flow out.


Well - that's exactly what I was talking about and what I do - at Jazz classes and working on stuff at home.

For me - I would have never discovered - to take Sam's example - using a diminished scale over certain dominant sevenths - on my own - never!! No matter how long I had been listening to Jazz records!

I would be thinking - well it sounds good when "xxxxxxx" does it but I have no idea where he got those notes from or how he chose them!!?? :confused:

So - my regular Jazz teacher (an alto player influenced by Lee Konitz) picks tunes, goes through and analyses them with us and explains his thinking about a solo, what scales he sees as open to him to use over each chord in constructing a solo...

Now what's wrong with that!!?? :confused:

S'MUEL - I'm getting all teary here...
That's what I been trying to say. Although there is a wide range of opinion here and I think everbody's points hav ebeen pretty well covered, anyone interested should take a cruise through the locked thread with the links at the top.

BRUISED - as far as why your teacher (who is an ensemble teacher and not a private teacher?) uses the approach he uses I couldn't tell you without talking to them. I can tell you- as a result of talking with people who know Lee Konitz, who have played with Lee Konitz, who studied with Lennie concurrently with Lee Konitz - that this approach is in many ways antithetical to the Tristano approach. And that's not the appraoch that Lee studied.For precisely the same reasons I (and S'MUEL so eloquently) have put forth.

This is the approach that I learned at Berklee (ie chord/scale) and got me to a point where I "sounded" like I could play and could make it through a tune. But it is also the apporach that led me to the dead end/brick wall I experienced within a year of moving to NYC. Much like MIKE DA MOOK's related experience, I was hearing people here making so much sense - solos full of ideas, intent and meaning - not just making it through the tune, but MAKING the tune happen. Believe me (and I'm not sure why you can't really seem to), the reason you don't sound like Sonny Rollins isn't because he knows some chord scales you don't.

As far as "I would have never discovered ...using a diminished scale over certain dominant sevenths - on my own" - well depending on the work you are doing, yes you would. The first time it happened for me was a few years back. I was working on playing the 4 part chords in all inversions among other stuff) so I'm playing diminished (along with others) every day, every key center, getting up and down the instrument. So I'm sitting outside my teacher's studio, waiting for the cat before me to get finished and Joe has his "real" bass in so he's playing his bass and the other student is playing the "teaching" bass and they're playing a blues. student will solo a chorus while Joe walks, Joe will solo a chorus while the student walks. And Joe is in the middle of a phrase and suddenly "damn, that's a diminished". And it's everywhere, in some Lester solos I'm working on, in sh*t I hear listening to records, when I'm in clubs. And now that I am hearing it, it's coming out in my palying. not becasue somebody told me it would and I'm plugging in notes from the scale, but becasue I CAN HEAR IT and where I hear it is a true and natural response to my aural environment.
To get back to your teacher, one of the reasons I am studying with Joe is because his methodology is getting me to the point where I make sense when I play. There are plenty of other teachers (and schools) out there who just work on vocabulary (chord scales, licks etc.) and seem to be more concerned with churning out players that can make it through a clubdate than with encouraging students to find their own voice. But personally, I'm tired of listening to cats whop are on the stand not playing any wrong notes, but not playing any right ones either.
Plug and play may sound like playing, but it's devoid of any meaning.

Here's an fun game - I just made 5 columns ( A, B, C, D and E) and 6 rows (1,2,3,4,5,6). Column A is ARTICLES, column B is ADJECTIVES column C is NOUNS column D is VERBS and column E is ADVERBS. Each number is a choice in that column. There's your chord scale, your note choices that will work over the chord change. Now write me a sentence that means something.

Well in these (ensemble) classes, out teacher has encouraged us to do other things - like free playing in duos and trios. But I was just saying that for me, the part I was describing was what helped me most in term of expanding my vocabulary and understanding what made a solo sound Jazzy.

So - I've played in rock groups for decades and have improvised bass solos and made up whole songs in a few minutes with guitarists - I have no problem hearing stuff and playing hours of music - but it never sounded like Jazz....

So - one of the teachers I have met, who teaches on eth Aebersold classes in the UK, does come out with sheets of Jazz licks to play and practice and he says that it is all about learning the vernacular...:hmm:

But the regular teacher I was talking about has never done that and just suggest we listen to the CDs and get a feel for it.

I tend to think that if I had unlimited time to practice and was doing a full-time Jazz course, I might well take the way you describe....but I don't and I would be happy to play a solo that was fluid, had no wrong notes and sounded Jazzy - at the moment that's the summit of my aspirations - although I am also an avid listener and want to understand this stuff more - but I don't see it as almost a kind of "Religion" !! ;)

If I like some music that I hear, then why should I care whether the person playing it , went to college and studied for 3-4 years, rather than spending 20 years in sweaty clubs listening and playing? :hmm:

Believe me (and I'm not sure why you can't really seem to), the reason you don't sound like Sonny Rollins isn't because he knows some chord scales you don't.


Ok - this may be true about me ;) - but I don't see how you can know this is the case with anybody else?

So, I played in rock/pop bands for many years and did meet some good musicians occasionally and saw lots of great rock musicians in the 70s.

So I can imagine that the exact reason some of these great players don't sound like Sonny Rollins is because he/she doesn't know some of the chord/scale relationships that Sonny does!

So, I can imagine somebody like Jimmy Page deciding that he wanted to take up Jazz in his late middle-age..... :hmm:

So, one of the groups that I liked best at my local Jazz club was called "Acoustic Ladyland" - a sax,piano,DB and drums quartet led a great Sax player called Pete Wareham, who has adapted Hendrix tunes to a Jazz idiom - this really spoke to me as an old rocker!! ;)

So, the spirit or motivation is the energy and great melodies of Hendrix - but the difference is the chords/scales that the musicians apply - I have the first bit already ....I just need the second part to help me do something like this!!

one of the teachers I have met, who teaches on eth Aebersold classes in the UK, does come out with sheets of Jazz licks to play and practice and he says that it is all about learning the vernacular... And I'm saying that it does about as much good approaching it this way as it would copying all of Shakespeare's plays if you wanted to be a playwright. Sam Shepard is not a contemproary version of Shakespeare, Sam Shepard understdands some of the same things that Will did about people and about language. Talk to Chris about Aebersold, he works with him alla time.

I would be happy to play a solo that was fluid, had no wrong notes and sounded Jazzy As I am very careful to always say here, Bruce, you don't have to want what I want. You have at many times in the past intimated that you DID want to play this music at a higher level. But do what you want. You just can't have it both ways - I want THIS result, but I only want to do THAT work - it's like a lot of other things garbage in, garbage out.

tend to think that if I had unlimited time to practice and was doing a full-time Jazz course As I said, do what you want. But I work a full time 40 hour week, have a girlfriend I been co habiting with for 25 years, cats, a mortgage, a life - but this is what I want to do so I study with a teacher, practice my little hour a day, session as often as I can and gig. Oh, and type here. again, it just depends on what you want. But if that's what you want, the work that needs to be done doesn't go away. You don't have to do it now, but you DO have to do it. Personally, my recommendation is to do it as early as you possibly can. That way you are making more music in the long run.

If I like some music that I hear, then why should I care whether the person playing it , went to college and studied for 3-4 years, rather than spending 20 years in sweaty clubs listening and playing? ***? Who are you talking to here, Bruce? This doesn't seem to be in response to anything I've said. Most of the musicians I enjoy listening to didn't go to college. But they did put a lot of time and study into this music. With the idea that what they wanted was to make a personal statement, not just "sound jazzy". You can like anything you want, listen to anything you want, I don't recall anyone saying anything different.
But if you say "I want to be a jazz musician" and not " I want to sound like a jazz musician to anybody who doesn't listen to this music much", then that's what you gotta work on.

Wanting to be a jazz musician isn't some moral high ground. If it IS what you want, then you need to work and I'm saying that the things you are typing about aren't, in my own bitter personal experience, going to get you to that goal.

You still owe me a sentence, young man.

There are plenty of other teachers (and schools) out there who just work on vocabulary (chord scales, licks etc.) and seem to be more concerned with churning out players that can make it through a clubdate than with encouraging students to find their own voice. But personally, I'm tired of listening to cats whop are on the stand not playing any wrong notes, but not playing any right ones either.
.

That last point you didn't get was in reply to this - above!

So - I have heard 21 - year old players out of college, at my local Jazz club who have impressed me and interested me with the music they made - should I not like them because they have been to college? ;)

So - I have heard 21 - year old players out of college, at my local Jazz club who have impressed me and interested me with the music they made - should I not like them because they have been to college? ;)

Of course not. But I'll bet you dinner that if they can play, they learned how to do that outside of school. College music programs are like the shed, only often without the instrument in your hands - you learn concepts, "vocabulary", and various other skills that you can choose to explore and flesh out if you so desire. The good ones do the exploring and fleshing out on their own time. The ones who think that what they "learned" in school should be enough on its own without putting in the time or effort to develop their own personal voice...well, they usually end up saying things like, "would you like to supersize your order?" a lot once they're out of school.

. . . I'm tired of listening to cats whop are on the stand not playing any wrong notes, but not playing any right ones either. Plug and play may sound like playing, but it's devoid of any meaning . . .

I am not a jazz player, but the theory conversations that spring up here at TB about it are so compelling that I can't help but get absorbed in them.

I completely understand what you are saying about no wrongs and no rights, but I don't understand why you feel someone's creativity is being stifled because of their methodology. You may have to consider the fact that they simply aren't very creative.

I see soloing as simply creating a unique melody on the fly. In order to do that within the context of what your fellow players are going, you have to have some ground rules, so, somehow, you have to throw the wrong notes out.

To say there is a right or wrong way to do that is like saying the creativity of painter is limited by how he or she goes about putting the paint on the pallet.

It's totally up to you what you do with the good ones. It is possible that someone could study and have a complete understanding of your methodology and still solo in a stiff and boring way. Others may offer something wonderfully appropriate and compelling in the context of thinking about using a scale as an appropriate "note filter."

I know others will chime in, so I'll try to keep it brief.

You may have to consider the fact that they simply aren't very creative.

My friend, I have more faith and confidence in people than that. I believe that any person who wants to be creative can find an echo of God's power within them. Do you really disagree?

My friend, I have more faith and confidence in people than that. I believe that any person who wants to be creative can find an echo of God's power within them. Do you really disagree?

No - but I find it much harder to believe that a creative person will have that creativity stifled by learning a few tricks and methods at college!! :hmm:

Now that we're getting spiritual and all...

Has anyone read/experienced Kenny Werner's "Effortless Mastery" book/videos? Does his method tie in with anything that's being discussed in these various threads?

I've read this and done some of the meditation exercises - which I enjoyed as relaxing, but I didn't feel it helped my playing at all - certainly not as much as studying chord/scale relationships!! ;)

My friend, I have more faith and confidence in people than that. I believe that any person who wants to be creative can find an echo of God's power within them. Do you really disagree?

Well, no, but the real question that is fairly asked here is "can you get the music in your head to come out of your bass?"

My thought is simply that a stiff solo may not be stiff because of methodology but because that is all that it is in the head, even if only at the time. And, likewise if something interesting and compelling is in your head, it isn't so important how you get it out of the instrument, but that you do.

OK, so to help Kevin, we find ourselves unable to duck the age-old question: Where to good ideas come from?

(Pulls up chair; grabs a tofu-pup.)

OK, so to help Kevin, we find ourselves unable to duck the age-old question: Where to good ideas come from?

(Pulls up chair; grabs a tofu-pup.)


Um, drawn from the Ether?

A black obelisk?

OK, so to help Kevin, we find ourselves unable to duck the age-old question: Where to good ideas come from?

(Pulls up chair; grabs a tofu-pup.)


Well - I thought I had always gone along with Ed when he had said in the past that the more vocabulary you had, the more chance you will say something meaningful or creative - but I'm confused now!! :hmm:

OK, so to help Kevin, we find ourselves unable to duck the age-old question: Where to good ideas come from?


Well, I have never really held myself responsible for "good" ideas, only ideas, as the "good" qualifier is more often than not subject to context and frequently subject to the opinions of others.

And we all know what they say about opinions.

OK, so if "good" is a minefield, let's not ditch the whole topic.

Here's a stab:

a) Musical ideas come to us when we're open to them
b) And, of course, we have to able to play what we hear
c) And we're listening
d) To what is happening around us
e) Through the matrix of our previous experience listening and playing

And so, I guess I'd correspondingly advise Kevin

a) Forget "fear" (or more accurately anxiety). Use your nervous energy to help you play with urgency. Approach your solo as a chance to make something new.

b) Yep, there's no substitute for practice. Practicing vocabulary isn't necessarily bad. Force-fitting pieces of noise into musical moments is.

c) Listen to jazz. There is no substitute, if you want to play jazz.

d) Listen to your colleagues on the bandstand. Before you solo, they've thrown dozens of ideas your way. Take some. Develop or react to them. If you aren't at the point where you can make pitches work, work with their rhythmic notions -- you KNOW you can do that.

e) Listen to yourself. Even if your band is suffering from a case of the dreaded Bass Solo Syndrome (i.e. the pianist's at the bar and the drummer's going rick-ticky-tick because, after all, it's a BASS solo and there's no need to contribute any REAL musical ideas, eh?) YOU just played something which can lead you somewhere.

Say more, folks, please.

I confess to not having read every post in this thread because well, I just don't have the time to even though I'm sure there's lots of good stuff in there.

In response to the original post, my $0.02:

Chris Fitzgerald has said this many times before and I think he MAY even have something posted on his site about it. Basically you need to discover what blanket scales and tones will work with a series of chords. Additionally it helps to know what the tonal center is at any time. Additionally it helps to know what sounds in and out of the changes both to your ear and in theory. Additionally it often helps to purposely play the more colourful notes (e.g. ninth, eleventh, etc.) to give your solo more umm colour. If I see a chord with a sharp 4 in it then you can be that I'll play that sharpened fourth a lot, not necessarily just out on its own but in a series of adjacent notes certainly.

This approach is the same approach that one can take to certain aspects of bass lines too. If you just play chord tones all the time based on the changes you see which may be typically every two beats, you will get locked in too much and end up playing a lot of the same stuff and a lot of stuff that often sounds too "trad".

This is a big topic and the above is just a small bit of advice that I'm sure someone can take out of context and jump all over but I post them just as some things to think about.

The other thing is don't just concentrate on the pitches of the notes. Rhythm (including rests) is a big part of any solo.

Something to try:

Try soloing over a modal song like "So What" where there are very few changes. Given one chord, what interesting stuff can you create?

In response to the actual fear of it all: A lot of people just play too many notes. Their solos suffer from TMS (too much stuff). Or they try to "come" to early. We call that premature solo ejaculation. Yes it's impressive to be able to show off all your chops in a solo but you shouldn't feel you have to. Listen to Miles and learn to play with the most economy. Then all of a sudden you concentrate on creating interest, tension, resolution, grabbing the attention of the audience, rather than on how to work with the changes which is to be honest only the means to the real end of making something musical. If you're playing with guys that can play a lot of notes on their instruments then contrast that by playing your solos with less notes. When I play with a couple of horns and guitar or piano and my turn comes to solo, often after "sheets of sound" from the other instruments, my solo may begin with perhaps a full bar or two of rest and then my first note will be a colourful note held for a few beats and starting in an odd place in the bar. You'd be amazed how many times the band turns around to look at me and the room goes silent as if to say "yeah man, what do you have to tell us - we're listening to you".

Adrian

Now that we're getting spiritual and all...

Has anyone read/experienced Kenny Werner's "Effortless Mastery" book/videos? Does his method tie in with anything that's being discussed in these various threads?

I've had the honor of not only reading the book, but also hearing him give his "EM" presentation several times. I think the concepts he puts forth are extremely valuable, and I go back and revisit them from time to time in my own way. I think the two most important concepts are:

1) "Getting out of the way" of the music, which means letting go of all preconceptions and ego involved in the notion of "what the music is supposed to be" before you play it. You aren't competing with/against some mythical "Standard of Jazz" when you sit down to play, you're just trying to make some music in the moment. You are who you are, whether you like it or not, so just deal with it and try to make the music that you are capable of making at any given moment.

2) "That is the most beautiful sound I've ever heard in my life". If you read the book, it sounds pretty hokey, but in real life, I've found it to be true. If you can learn to get more deeply into the moment and simply enjoy each sound on a broad and intuitive level, it is possible to learn to see (hear) the beauty in the simple act of producing tone on any instrument. Kind of related to the above in that it's really about not making value judgements as you play, but deeper than that. Basically, play anything you want, and learn to appreciate it for the sound it is, and realize that it is possible to make interesting and even great music out of just about any idea. The trick is being open enough not to reject the idea out of hand before it has a chance to grow.

Of course, all of this is no substitute for putting in the work (listening, practicing technique, practicing conception, etc...) required to become a better player. But in my experience, the feeling of being very "open" on the bandstand once the other work is done is one of the great lessons every musician needs to learn to some extent or other.

Cool, Chris. I've wanted to check that stuff out for a while.

It makes you wonder if the "cats" were working on this level in one way or another. It seems that Werner eschews things like ego and competition, yet these things were inherent in jazz from the get-go ie jam sessions, cutting contests, I'm the baddest, etc.

Well - I thought I had always gone along with Ed when he had said in the past that the more vocabulary you had, the more chance you will say something meaningful or creative - but I'm confused now!! :hmm:

Vocabulary CAN make it easier to express yourself but having a large vocabulary does not in any way guarantee that what you'll say makes any sense or will have an impact on the listener. You can have the biggest vocabulary in the world but if you can't string sentences together and make a coherent speech then it's all for nothing. Furthermore, if all you can do is regurgitate bits of what other guys said (notice I said ALL and I'm talking about an extreme here) then where's the originality in that? Is it good to sound just like (insert name here) and even be mistaken for him/her?

The solo is your chance to take centre stage and have your say. Sometimes you want to say "what the other guy said (insert a few notes here) I want to say that too but also this and that". Other times you just to say "here is my statement". Saying what you want to say is the most important part of the solo and everything else is just the means to the communication. For some people, having and using a large vocabulary with lots of big words (riffs) is part of their schtick and there's nothing wrong with that, but one shouldn't feel the need to do the same.

Sometimes you'll hear somebody say something and they use a lot of big words that nobody understands. People are impressed by the vocabulary but they aren't exactly sure what the hell the guy meant. How useful is that?

Adrian

BOOST - pull out a quote, that is SO antithetical to my position I've got to wonder HOW you came to it. Yes you work on vocabulary, you work on increasing your deopth of understanding of the language. But AS I HAVE BEEN CONSTANTLY SAYING since I've started posting on this site, IT'S NOT ABOUT VOCABULARY, it's about meaning and intent and communication. You should be able to communicate with whatever level your everyday vocabulary is. You don't have to memorise half the dictionary to have a conversation, all you need is the words that (in this analogy) you "hear" and have the meaning and all nuances for ingrained in your being. Bruce if what you have gotten out of all of this stuff that I've been typing is that vocabulary is the important thing, then you have SERIOUSLY missed my point. As I have said in a reply posted since my return - "That kitty acts funny" and "I am infinitely amused by the antics of that juvenile feline" don't really mean anything different. Both of them mean more than "Kitty antics I funny are am". Which is, to me, what this inordinate concentration on gaining vocabulary (using the diminished scale on the V7 chord, for example) is all about. AND WHY I'VE HAVE ALWAYS SAID JUST...SAY.. NO to the chord scale approach. Keerist.


WHERE DO IDEAS COME FROM - I think them up.

Good ideas, well I do think there are such things as good ideas. Looking both ways before you cross the street is a good idea. It's quality of goodness is evident in the result it provides - survival. When you play something you hear in your head, there is the execution factor -did I play what I was hearing?

But there's also the quality factor - did what I play in some way communicate to the other musicians, to the audience? How close am I to that moment of true poetic beauty? Have we (the players) managed to reach a point where this interplay of idea and conception has transcended the situation where yes we are playing JUST FRIENDS in F, and reached a point where what is actually occurring is that we aren't playing a tune we are playing with each other and what we play is entirely interdependant on what everyone else is playing.
I would say that was a good idea.

That last point you didn't get was in reply to this - above!

So - I have heard 21 - year old players out of college, at my local Jazz club who have impressed me and interested me with the music they made - should I not like them because they have been to college? ;)


You're doing this on purpose, right? Cause you know I got a weak heart and am prone to snivelling, right?

Bruce, I truly don't know how to say this. You can like ANYTHING you want played by ANYBODY. But plug-and-play is keeping you happy, right? Do you accept the possibility that you may not now be able to hear the difference between somebody who is just running changes and somebody who is playing some serious sh*t? I know I couldn't. And I know that the more work I put in, the more I can hear. And the more I hear, the more I hear where it AIN'T happening in things that I used to like. And there's some stuff that HAS stood up.

The deeper you get into ANYTHING, whether it's music or stamp collecting, the more you appreciate nuance. and those that can distill meaning from the vapor of nuance.

Vocabulary like technique is only a tool to make the music. The reason why you learn all the theory of soloing and improvisation is so that a lot of it just comes naturally and is under the fingers to the point that you can spend 90% of your time and effort thinking about the communication and what makes sense to play at the time instead of how to play it.

The point is that it is important to learn all this stuff - the theory, the vocaulary, etc. and then you need to in essence forget about it when you play. As you do so, your amazing brain will take care of retrieving and using those finer details to help you get your ideas out.

Improvisation and jazz and what makes it so exciting is all about the spur of the moment. What makes sense at that exact moment in time because the pianist just left some space for you in his comp'ing or he played something one bar ago that you want to hook into or perhaps the previous soloist played something you want to hook into or perhaps the woman at the table in front is looking bored or not paying attention so you want to get her involved. Or perhaps you just want to impress her because she's good looking and appears to be single so you reach for your bow and...

I dunno.

Let me add my $0.02.

What I think I hear Ed saying is that you need to be able to HEAR sounds for what they are before you can apply them. If so, I agree 100%. I recall many, many times on gigs asking one of the other players what some lick they had played was. They would tell me, I would go home and mess around with it and over time the light bulb would come on in my head. This has been for me a slow process but it does work.

The biggest problem I have always had with jazz instruction is there is a lot of emphasis on fundamentals like running scales and chords through all keys in all areas of the neck, learning the circle of fifths, etc. and then just saying "OK, go listen" :confused:

I listened to jazz for many years before I realized how many of the tunes were just 12 bar blues! Then I started being able to recognize rhythm changes, etc. It just shows how untrained my ear was (and is).

Meanwhile, stuff I learned by rote (like Ed mentioned) has gotten me through gigs but for every phrase that sounds good I'll play another that "fits the rule" but sounds like crap. So I also agree that the rules by themselves are a dead end.

What seems to me the thing that separates good players from hacks like me is how quickly they develop their ears to hear musical phrases and know what they are immediately.

What helps me with my ear now is transcription; I still find transcribing a painfully slow process but I understand it will get easier and easier the more of it I do so I plow on. Every transcription I do gives me more stuff to work on.

perhaps i'm just missing something here but, i don't see why it isn't possible to describe several chordal tones to play over the common changes. for example, i have been told that a ii7 to V change such as the Am7 to D7 in autumn leaves, is ok for playing the am7 or d7 chordal tones over it. a simple lick, based on this logic might be playing passing notes into the third and fifth of the D chord during the first two measures. alternatively, i have been told that playing a diminished chord one HALF step above a 7th is an appropriate substitute lick, so perhaps you chould play an Eb diminished over the first two measures...is this logic correct?

thanks!

BOOST - pull out a quote, that is SO antithetical to my position I've got to wonder HOW you came to it. Yes you work on vocabulary, you work on increasing your deopth of understanding of the language. But AS I HAVE BEEN CONSTANTLY SAYING since I've started posting on this site, IT'S NOT ABOUT VOCABULARY, it's about meaning and intent and communication. You should be able to communicate with whatever level your everyday vocabulary is. You don't have to memorise half the dictionary to have a conversation, all you need is the words that (in this analogy) you "hear" and have the meaning and all nuances for ingrained in your being. Bruce if what you have gotten out of all of this stuff that I've been typing is that vocabulary is the important thing, then you have SERIOUSLY missed my point. As I have said in a reply posted since my return - "That kitty acts funny" and "I am infinitely amused by the antics of that juvenile feline" don't really mean anything different. Both of them mean more than "Kitty antics I funny are am". Which is, to me, what this inordinate concentration on gaining vocabulary (using the diminished scale on the V7 chord, for example) is all about. AND WHY I'VE HAVE ALWAYS SAID JUST...SAY.. NO to the chord scale approach. Keerist.


.

Well - as you have "conveniently" deleted all your old posts I can't provide the quotes to where I got all that from....:hmm:

But I definitely remember in discussions with people who said you don't need theory - many analogies about writing and telling people that they need to expand their vocabulary etc....

Besides - I see no difference between what I am talking about and what Chas described in his last few posts.....:confused:

My point is that I have never said in any of my posts you should fit any old notes/licks/scales in....I was just saying that my teacher sits down with us and analyses what his approach to choosing notes would be, when confronted with a new song - why he would favour certain scales, how he would construct a solo, light and shade, dissonance and resolutions etc. etc.

Of course he doesn't say we should shoehorn any of this into solos that we play - he is giving us stuff to go away and practice - think about the alternatives you have - I don't see this as harmful - it is just giving you more choices to draw upon - you don't have to use them, if they don't sound right.

In fact he has said many times that we have to have the conviction that it sounds right to us, or we won't convince any audience - and he has often demonstrated how extremely dissonant note choices can be made to sound "right" if the player has conviction and can take the listener with him.

I think the point is though - that in an internet discussion like this - to say : "play what sounds right to you" is just a waste of time - like Duh, I could have worked that out for myself - whereas the idea that if you analyse the functional harmony in a tune, then you can see that certain scales will sound more or less dissonant with each of the chords at that point - might be something that some readers wouldln't have thought of....?
:hmm:

Then poll the constituency -

HEY EVERYBODY! In your best recollection, do I come down on the side of learning vocabulary or do I promote going slowly to a deeper understanding, playing based on what you're hearing and playing ONLy what you hear?

You can start a poll, you like to do that, right?

TWIZ, honey, sorry to hijack your thread. Did you get a chance to look through the other threads recommended?
Did you get a chance to look through Chris' lesson? I'm sorry that there's not a short and easy answer, but despite Bruce's conviction that he has a clue, it's not as easy as saying "play these notes over this set of chords".

But that's just me and my approach. Feel free to do something different. AS I CONTINUE TO SAY Bruce, the only reason I am slightly adamant about this is - I did that other stuff, chord scale these notes work over this change just get more vocabulary and it led me into a brick wall dead end. It is my somewhat informed opinion that this will lead to similar dead ends for those involved in its pursuit. Anyone who doesn't think so is perfectly happy to feel that way.

Just talk to me in 15 years and tell me you still feel that way.

I don't know Bruce, it just seems to me that you got caught with your pants down and you've been spending the last couple of pages of this thread trying to make yourself look good.

I don't want this to be offensive, because it isn't intended to be, but Bruce I hear a lot of your jazz workshops. A lot. It seems that it's your only reference. I wonder how much actually playing night in and night out, with disparate musicians, you have under your belt. In jazz I mean. This is not to discount your opinion, and this is not to say that someone like Ed or Sam or Chris is always going to be right. Actually, I don't know what it's to say. Except maybe this, instead of concerning yourself with "winning" a discussion, why don't you, just for once, go back and honestly look at what's being said. It's not always us miscontruing you.

I do have to say that if I had to summarize Ed's position, it would not be one of simply accruing vocabulary. In fact it would be the opposite. He keeps telling me to slow down, and I think he's right. I used to play with a keyboard player and when I would be doing something that didn't fit, he would yell "LISTEN". Point is, I was getting flustered about mechanics when if I really *heard* everything going on, it would be more globally applicable. So the point is to slow down, listen and hear.

Anyway, the only reason I replied is that it is an auspicious day when I agree unequivocally with Ed!

Then poll the constituency -
TWIZ, honey, sorry to hijack your thread. Did you get a chance to look through the other threads recommended?
Did you get a chance to look through Chris' lesson? I'm sorry that there's not a short and easy answer, but despite Bruce's conviction that he has a clue, it's not as easy as saying "play these notes over this set of chords".


as much as i've grown used to this type of response to such a simple question, it's always a bit frustrating to hear. yes of course i have read and reread as much as i can and frankly 90% of the material i have read is consistent with previous written material that all seems to skip the "lesson" in between memorizing intervals, key signatures, and basic changes to listening and interpreting to Bird's solos

alas, i shall take my questions elsewhere.

Twiz, I don't think you need to take your questions elsewhere. What you need to do is read between the lines and get to the center of what's being said. Basically what Ed is saying (as I understand it) is instead of worrying about what scale goes with what chord, learn the SOUND of the notes in that chord. Practice arpeggios, first from the root, then the 3rd, then 5th, then 7th in all keys. Get to know them very well all over your instrument, then go back to Autumn Leaves and start playing the arpeggios (that you should be very comfortable with now) arpegiate the changes, but not all from the root. Start with the first chord Cmin7 in root position C Eb G Bb, then F7 A F Eb C etc . . .
As you do this SURPRISE! You'll HEAR some actual lines coming from your hands to your instrument to your ears! There is more work to do than that, but believe me this is the BEST jumping off point.
I used to think about scales and my playing sounded like . . . well . . . scales. I've played many a session even gig where the comping instrument just stopped and the band looked like WHAT!?! during my solos because I was just running scales unrelated to any changes.
I'm not saying don't learn scales and modes though. You should! What I'm trying to say is worrying about what scale to play over each chord in a tune is exhuasting.
Just my $.02, and Ed I hope I described your/Joe's method correctly, if I didn't I'm sorry.

HEY EVERYBODY! In your best recollection, do I come down on the side of learning vocabulary or do I promote going slowly to a deeper understanding, playing based on what you're hearing and playing ONLy what you hear?

My mother kindly reminded me of one of the master classes Jeff Bradetich kindly offered, where he asked whether the victim onstage liked the way Jeff mimicked the victime playing a particular line (he played this first) or the way Jeff really wanted the victim to play that particular line.

The smart victim (he was second in line and paid close attention to the first victim's experience) quickly proclaimed the second choices were the most likable and solicited much good-natured laughter from the audience.

O.K., a large vocabulary alone does not ensure for a speech worth giving or hearing. One should want say something, or have an idea, when it's his turn to speak. I like Samuel's post on this quite a lot. But I don't see any crime in TWIZ's innocently delivered vocabulary questions, and if I knew why I would want to use an Ebdim scale around those chords rather than play the first melodic line that came to me and jive it until my time was up I'd answer the question.

I don't think Twiz is wrong asking the question he did, I don't think anybody does. The whole point of this board is to give newbies a chance to interact with more experienced players, so someone will ask "what scale should I play on this chord?" and more experienced players try to explain a better path to playing an improvised line that makes the changes and expresses the music in their own head.
The problem I see is that some people take it as a personal assult when someone expresses a viewpoint different from their own.
Personally, I feel that learning chord/scale relationships without learning chord to chord relationships is not the way to go.
and if I knew why I would want to use an Ebdim scale around those chords rather than play the first melodic line that came to me and jive it until my time was up I'd answer the question.

Nobody is saying to "jive" until your time is up.

Forgive me if I missed this, but do you have a teacher Twiz? What does he/she say? If aren't studying with anybody you should many of these questions will be answered.

Forgive me if I missed this, but do you have a teacher Twiz? What does he/she say? If aren't studying with anybody you should many of these questions will be answered.

thanks to everyone for your responses. i actually had a teacher for a few lessons... but i think this person's jazz elitism was a bit much to bear (and frankly i have a full time job and can't ever be on par with the pros that this person was teaching regularly), another teacher i tried out was more of the typical guitar teacher (here's some sheet music, go practice some ray brown blues lines, etc etc) ... the reality is, i have been looking for someone to sit down and explain to me what the heck is going on in plain english and i just haven't found that person yet. perhaps i'll try to find an academic piano teacher --- at least there are more to choose from...

but i digress, mike, your point is WELL taken, for a long time i have been doing just that, thinking 3 4 b5 5 over a given major chord or trying out combinations of 3 5 R b7 over 7ths, and it's been fun, but I find it insane to think that all these pros are playing the chordal notes for each chord which can change 1, 2 or more times per measure. does that mean during a jam on Dexterity, i'm supposed to be thinking 2 chords / minute at light speed? seems a bit much, doesn't it? anyway, the whole point of my thread to begin with was, rather than thinking, i MUST play each chord each measure, i have been told there are some "tricks", like during a ii V7 change you can play the ii chordal notes throughout the two measures... i assume these "tricks" are compiled somewhere, because right now i feel VERY limited if i have to stress out shifting so rapidly from one chord to another.

Or perhaps you just want to impress her because she's good looking and appears to be single so you reach for your bow and...


Yeah, just look how that worked out for PULL HERBUMTONES....








(Hint: The avatar. Check the avatar)

Originally posted by:Twiz
i have been told there are some "tricks", like during a ii V7 change you can play the ii chordal notes throughout the two measures... i assume these "tricks" are compiled somewhere, because right now i feel VERY limited if i have to stress out shifting so rapidly from one chord to another.

What you are talking about is true, I think you should figure out why you can play the notes of the ii chord over a ii-V. If you look at a ii-V in Cmajor ii= D F A C, V7= G B D F they share common tones the ii chord has the 5 7 9 of the V7 chord. One thing to think about is that you want to bring the B of the G7 chord into play when making the V7 chord because it's the leading tone to the tonic, CMaj. In general, when learning a tune, look over the chords for common tones then find the best way to connect those tones. Alot of times you can just use a parent scale, look at ALL THE THINGS YOU ARE. The first 8 bars are:
F-7 1 bar Bb-7 1bar Eb7 1 bar Abmaj7 1 bar Dbmaj7 1 bar D-7 G7 1 bar Cmaj7 2 bars.
Now for the first 5 bars you can think of the Ab major scale, bar 6 D dorian (2nd mode of C major), bars 7 and 8 C major scale.
It's really important to learn major sacles and their modes plus the diatonic chords built off major scales, if for no other reason it will help you make connections in the tunes.

In the case of Autumn Leaves, you're looking at a minor key, G minor.
It's a little more complicated, but learnable. For now though look at the first 4 bars as ii7-V7-I7-IV7 in Bb major and think parent scale. As for the 2nd 4 bars ii-7b5-V7-i7 in G minor and parent scale.
For that you need to know natural, harmonic, and melodic minor plus the modes and chords of these scales. It seems like alot, but you'll soon see that there are "common" chords used in minor.
It's just a matter of the more you know the better off you are.
If I can recommend a book, Creative Improvisation by Scott Reeves, he is a teacher at my school (and an excellent trombone player) it's a great book that has answers to most of your questions.

I do have to add one thing, This is a basic JUMPING OFF POINT! It is something that will get you playing over the changes without thinking about every chord on every bar. But this is in no way a substitute for FOCUSED STUDY really digging into the music and finding many different ways to express yourself. Plus, my recomendation for arpeggiating over the tune is a PRACTICE EXERCIZE not a way of improvising! On a gig or in a session your work in the practice room should inform your soloing, not dictate it.

but i digress, mike, your point is WELL taken, for a long time i have been doing just that, thinking 3 4 b5 5 over a given major chord or trying out combinations of 3 5 R b7 over 7ths, and it's been fun, but I find it insane to think that all these pros are playing the chordal notes for each chord which can change 1, 2 or more times per measure. does that mean during a jam on Dexterity, i'm supposed to be thinking 2 chords / minute at light speed? seems a bit much, doesn't it? anyway, the whole point of my thread to begin with was, rather than thinking, i MUST play each chord each measure, i have been told there are some "tricks", like during a ii V7 change you can play the ii chordal notes throughout the two measures... i assume these "tricks" are compiled somewhere, because right now i feel VERY limited if i have to stress out shifting so rapidly from one chord to another.

The trick is to know the tune, the melody and the harmony. If you're listening to "Dexterity" and cannot recognize that it's "Rhythm Changes" you have a lot of work to do. You see a lot of changes, I see I VI7 iim7 V7 repeated in the A sections and the bridge or B section is III7 VI7 II7 V7.

You're stressed out because you don't have a handle on what your hearing. A good deal of this thread is talking about hearing but I will admit it's not really addressing the fundamental hearing that you are grappling with. I used to not be able to hear these changes but after to playing the changes over and over and over and over again, it got into my head and now if I hear a tune based on those changes I recognize it. Once you can do that you can begin to create ideas based on what you're hearing and what you're feeling.

Alot of times you can just use a parent scale, look at ALL THE THINGS YOU ARE. The first 8 bars are:
F-7 1 bar Bb-7 1bar Eb7 1 bar Abmaj7 1 bar Dbmaj7 1 bar D-7 G7 1 bar Cmaj7 2 bars.
Now for the first 5 bars you can think of the Ab major scale, bar 6 D dorian (2nd mode of C major), bars 7 and 8 C major scale.
It's really important to learn major sacles and their modes plus the diatonic chords built off major scales, if for no other reason it will help you make connections in the tunes.


Oooh, I hate that scale notion because I think one would sound better on this tune, especially if you're new to it, by playing the chord tones since the melody is harmonized in such a way that darn near every melody note is the 3rd of the chord notated.

thanks mike

this is extraordinarily helpful

see, i'm the type of guy that'll rush back to Microsoft Excel and make 50 tables analyzing the logic of these notes and their relationships to each other.

Originally posted by Phil Smith:
I used to not be able to hear these changes but after to playing the changes over and over and over and over again, it got into my head and now if I hear a tune based on those changes I recognize it. Once you can do that you can begin to create ideas based on what you're hearing and what you're feeling.

I can't agree with that more, but I think that Twiz's problem has to do with understanding as well as hearing the changes. Plus there are SO MANY people who only talk about scale/chord relationships it makes one feel inadequate if they don't know how diminished scales work over V7 chords. I have personally been through this and thought going back to school to study music would just give me a library of "slick scales" to play. Funny enough one of the biggest things emphasized is HEARING not running scales. I'm working on hearing chromatic approach notes and getting them out when I play.

Originally posted by Phil Smith:
Oooh, I hate that scale notion because I think one would sound better on this tune, especially if you're new to it, by playing the chord tones since the melody is harmonized in such a way that darn near every melody note is the 3rd of the chord notated.

I agree, but when I was struggling with trying to get from chord to chord in a melodic way it really helped. Plus like I said right after that, it's a jumping off point. I hit a wall with this method and believe some people need to have that happen.

Originally posted by Twiz:
see, i'm the type of guy that'll rush back to Microsoft Excel and make 50 tables analyzing the logic of these notes and their relationships to each other.
You should be more concerned with running to your instrument and and try to make melodies with those notes. :)

Some time ago some one here told abut this blind guy, who hadn´t played the Bass in his whole life. But this guy could play anything with many instruments. He was given a double bass and after a few minutes he could play anything on it, too. And sounded great, of course.
He just has the ability to transfer the sounds from his head immediately to the instrument in his hands. No scales studies anywhere else than inside his head. He just HEARS the s***,
because that´s the only way a blind guy can study music.
That can be called talent, too. No matter if you see the notes with your eyes or not.

R2

I don't know Bruce, it just seems to me that you got caught with your pants down and you've been spending the last couple of pages of this thread trying to make yourself look good.


This is very strange - I as simply asking Ed why what my teacher does with our class is somehow "wrong" and I still don't really have an answer - I've been asking questions, as I don't have as much time as I would like to work on music and don't want to feel I'm wasting my time


I don't want this to be offensive, because it isn't intended to be, but Bruce I hear a lot of your jazz workshops. A lot. It seems that it's your only reference. I wonder how much actually playing night in and night out, with disparate musicians, you have under your belt.

Well - the point is that we are talking about Jazz education and how you go about getting better, I'm never going to say I'm a better musician than Ed, Sam, Chris or anyone - why would I want to anyway :confused: - I am interested in their opinions and am relating their advice to what I have been told by UK Jazz educators/teachers - so I think this is my perspective and why it comes up a lot.

We are talking about how to prepare, what to study - how to get better - so I don't see why you have a problem with me talking about classes/workshops/lessons etc - this is the subject under discussion!! :confused:

The reason I come here a lot is to get these things right in my head - purely selfishly speaking I don't really care if anybody else thinks I'm right or wrong, I just want to know why or how it all fits together. But I think there is this problem of being on a purely text medium, where you take bits of something out of context.

But from a less selfish point of view, what Ed is saying may be exactly the same as I've heard from others in a different context and I have no doubt other people feel the same way and are equally confused about how the approach they are working on, differs from what Ed is saying?



In jazz I mean. This is not to discount your opinion, and this is not to say that someone like Ed or Sam or Chris is always going to be right. Actually, I don't know what it's to say. Except maybe this, instead of concerning yourself with "winning" a discussion, why don't you, just for once, go back and honestly look at what's being said. It's not always us miscontruing you.

As I have tried to explain above, I am not interested in winning a argument - I just want to know what is wrong with taking a tune, looking at the chords and their function(in context of the melody possibly), then discussing what scales are available to you for each part of the tune?

This is important to me as we do a lot of this in the Jazz classes I attend on Saturday mornings - so at the moment it is between terms, but when I go back to this in April, I want to know this is a valuable use of time and may talk to my teacher about it...so I want to be sure what I am talking about and that Ed hasn't misconstrued what I mean? :hmm:

What you are talking about is true, I think you should figure out why you can play the notes of the ii chord over a ii-V. If you look at a ii-V in Cmajor ii= D F A C, V7= G B D F they share common tones the ii chord has the 5 7 9 of the V7 chord. One thing to think about is that you want to bring the B of the G7 chord into play when making the V7 chord because it's the leading tone to the tonic, CMaj. In general, when learning a tune, look over the chords for common tones then find the best way to connect those tones. Alot of times you can just use a parent scale, look at ALL THE THINGS YOU ARE. The first 8 bars are:
F-7 1 bar Bb-7 1bar Eb7 1 bar Abmaj7 1 bar Dbmaj7 1 bar D-7 G7 1 bar Cmaj7 2 bars.
Now for the first 5 bars you can think of the Ab major scale, bar 6 D dorian (2nd mode of C major), bars 7 and 8 C major scale.
It's really important to learn major sacles and their modes plus the diatonic chords built off major scales, if for no other reason it will help you make connections in the tunes.

In the case of Autumn Leaves, you're looking at a minor key, G minor.
It's a little more complicated, but learnable. For now though look at the first 4 bars as ii7-V7-I7-IV7 in Bb major and think parent scale. As for the 2nd 4 bars ii-7b5-V7-i7 in G minor and parent scale.
For that you need to know natural, harmonic, and melodic minor plus the modes and chords of these scales. It seems like alot, but you'll soon see that there are "common" chords used in minor.
It's just a matter of the more you know the better off you are.
.


To Jazzbo - not Mike!! ;)

So - this is what confuses me and why I persist in this !!

So - Mike is outlining the sort of process I was describing and initially suggesting(2 or 3 pages ago!) - but as far as I can make out, Ed is saying I was wrong to suggest that? :confused:

So - why aren't people picking on Mike in the way they did to me? :confused:

I just think this whole thread is very confusing and it's not about winning or losing an argument, as getting things straight!! :hmm:

Honestly Bruce, I think it's just timing. I posted that reply at about midnight EST, Ed, Chris, and most other east coast TBers were probally sleeping. But I believe the problem here is a failure to express your concept clearly, too many people are content just knowing what scales to plug in without knowing why that scale works. Before my post I didn't see any explain the links between the chord and scale, it seemed like "on a ii-V just play dorian" that's it! Plus I admit this is just a study point, not the way to play jazz. I do believe that Ed's way of study is one of the best ways to go (I say one of because I don't know every path of study).
Plus the ONLY reason I even posted what I did was the fact that I could sense the frustration in Twiz's post.
I think you're missing a major point Bruce, you talk about sounding jazzy, Ed is talking about playing improvised music (in this case jazz) with conviction, intent, and a high degree of personal expression. The major point is this if YOU are happy with your playing and your method of study works for YOU, why care what someone else thinks about it? But understand, many people have hit a wall with the methodolgy you defend, keep your mind open, you may find yourself in the same place. I did.
Mike

But I believe the problem here is a failure to express your concept clearly, too many people are content just knowing what scales to plug in without knowing why that scale works. Before my post I didn't see any explain the links between the chord and scale, it seemed like "on a ii-V just play dorian" that's it! Plus I admit this is just a study point, not the way to play jazz. I do believe that Ed's way of study is one of the best ways to go (I say one of because I don't know every path of study).
Plus the ONLY reason I even posted what I did was the fact that I could sense the frustration in Twiz's post.

I think you're missing a major point Bruce, you talk about sounding jazzy, Ed is talking about playing improvised music (in this case jazz) with conviction, intent, and a high degree of personal expression. The major point is this if YOU are happy with your playing and your method of study works for YOU, why care what someone else thinks about it? But understand, many people have hit a wall with the methodolgy you defend, keep your mind open, you may find yourself in the same place. I did.
Mike

I'm not really defending any particular methodology and I was only talking about sounding "Jazzy" as this was what I experienced. So - I've been improvising music for 30 years - but it never sounded Jazzy, until I started looking at what alternate scales were available, following on from analysis and discussion with my teacher.

So - the post of yours that I copied above describes exactly the sort of thing that we have been doing and what I was suggesting on page one of this debate - but for some reason I still don't fully understand, Ed criticised me for this!! :confused:

Originally posted by Twiz:
i actually had a teacher for a few lessons... but i think this person's jazz elitism was a bit much to bear (and frankly i have a full time job and can't ever be on par with the pros that this person was teaching regularly),
I think you need to keep looking for a teacher, not all are jazz elitists. Plus it doesn't matter if you'll never be on par with more professional players, it's not why you play is it? I know it's not my reason to play. I used to work full time and took lessons on DB it's not such a big thing. I'm able to do this full time (study and play) is due to some rather unfortunate events. I lost my job after 9/11 due to a slow down in business, I collected unemployment for 9 months. In that time I really got my playing tgether, started giging on a regular basis, and went to music school. But my first 13 years of music study was all done after working 40 hours a week, the first 2 years of DB study (the hardest thing I've done musically to date) was done after my 40 hours in. Some GREAT players on this board, Ed for example is one of them.

I think you need to keep looking for a teacher, not all are jazz elitists. Plus it doesn't matter if you'll never be on par with more professional players, it's not why you play is it? I know it's not my reason to play. I used to work full time and took lessons on DB it's not such a big thing. I'm able to do this full time (study and play) is due to some rather unfortunate events. I lost my job after 9/11 due to a slow down in business, I collected unemployment for 9 months. In that time I really got my playing tgether, started giging on a regular basis, and went to music school. But my first 13 years of music study was all done after working 40 hours a week, the first 2 years of DB study (the hardest thing I've done musically to date) was done after my 40 hours in. Some GREAT players on this board, Ed for example is one of them.


This makes a lot sense to me - I'm not in this to be able to earn a living as a Jazz player - I just do it for enjoyment and the social side - meeting others and playing music with them !

I have been in bands with recording contracts, but I gave that up long ago and want to play music for my own enjoyment.

I used to be in Personnel/Human Resources policy and studied for professional qualifications and membership of the UK professional body.

So there is a lot of research into "preferred learning styles" and the idea that one style of learning may not be suitable for another person. The idea being through self-analysis to determine which learning style suits you and develop your own learning programme - not just to unquestioningly do what somebody else tells you is good for you.

So - to take a simplistic example - the type of learning that suits extraverts, will not usually suit introverts....

Also, a lot of people react badly to authority figures and will fight against them - so it is far better to let people like that choose their own programme of study and they will end up far more motivated.

Honestly Bruce, I think it's just timing. I posted that reply at about midnight EST, Ed, Chris, and most other east coast TBers were probally sleeping.

Don't I wish!

But I believe the problem here is a failure to express your concept clearly, too many people are content just knowing what scales to plug in without knowing why that scale works.

The problem is that there is no one "right" or "simple" way to go about it. I advocate a methodology that Ed disagrees with in part - but he is kind enough to acknowledge that it works for me in my playing. Ed advocates a methodology that focuses on learning concepts in a different order (chronologically) than I do, but again, it works for him, and I can hear that it works in his playing.

But what we are both saying together is that it's about much more than methodology: whatever methodology you use, it's about hearing what you are trying to say BEFORE you try to say it. What is the same in both of our views is the idea that, however a person may manage to get the music from the "concept" stage to the "hearing" stage, the goal should be to get beyond "thinking" about sounds to "hearing" sounds. We could argue methodology all day, but this last is the bottom line.

I'll type more later - busy day!

The big point, as I see it is this, Ed's talking about playing this music on a deeper more personal level, being able to hear HIS music as HE here's it. Bruce you are talking about "sounding jazzy." I see a big difference here. I've been reading Coltrane's biography by Lewis Porter and have to say that the only time the words "sound jazzy" or any other term to express that point is when critics are quoted. Trane talks about playing the music he hears in his head, finding a deeper more personal means of expression.
I consider Trane to be an artsit of the highest order, a place I'd like to visit for a while in my life, Trane isn't concerned with "sounding jazzy". None of the greats were, tell me where Louis, Duke, Bird, Mingus, Bill, Miles have said they want to "sound jazzy".
I'm not saying you're not valid in your thinking, plenty of people just want to enjoy playing the music and like just being able to sound like jazz is enough. But understand that isn't the the same as creating jazz. Well maybe if you're Winton then it is.

The problem is that there is no one "right" or "simple" way to go about it. I advocate a methodology that Ed disagrees with in part - but he is kind enough to acknowledge that it works for me in my playing. Ed advocates a methodology that focuses on learning concepts in a different order (chronologically) than I do, but again, it works for him, and I can hear that it works in his playing.

But what we are both saying together is that it's about much more than methodology: whatever methodology you use, it's about hearing what you are trying to say BEFORE you try to say it. What is the same in both of our views is the idea that, however a person may manage to get the music from the "concept" stage to the "hearing" stage, the goal should be to get beyond "thinking" about sounds to "hearing" sounds. We could argue methodology all day, but this last is the bottom line.


This is all very well and I understand what you're saying there - but the original question that started this thread was talking about specific things and was not at this "level" - if that's what you want to call it - so I was originally replying to this :

"a lot of bassists will stress that you should forget about scales and focus on playing the chords and chordal substitutes, so in autumn leaves, focus on playing the notes forming the Am7 chord, D7 chord, G7 chord, etc etc. "

I was saying that I believe that you can't afford to ignore scales - but of course you have to understand how they relate to chords and functional harmony....

So - I still don't see why I was criticised for saying that? :confused:

The big point, as I see it is this, Ed's talking about playing this music on a deeper more personal level, being able to hear HIS music as HE here's it. Bruce you are talking about "sounding jazzy." I see a big difference here. I've been reading Coltrane's biography by Lewis Porter and have to say that the only time the words "sound jazzy" or any other term to express that point is when critics are quoted. Trane talks about playing the music he hears in his head, finding a deeper more personal means of expression.
.

I don't see this as a problem - so I have stressed throughout that this is only my "shorthand", in terms of defining my experience of playing other styles of music for many years, then coming to Jazz - so I am just saying that's what it sounds like to me - I am quite happy that somebody else hears that scale against that chord and thinks - it's just a diminished scale!! ;)

No - I think the big point is what I have said in my reply to Chris above - that's where my problem lies....:hmm:

I'm not really defending any particular methodology and I was only talking about sounding "Jazzy" as this was what I experienced. So - I've been improvising music for 30 years - but it never sounded Jazzy, until I started looking at what alternate scales were available, following on from analysis and discussion with my teacher.

So - the post of yours that I copied above describes exactly the sort of thing that we have been doing and what I was suggesting on page one of this debate - but for some reason I still don't fully understand, Ed criticised me for this!! :confused:

So, you're saying that you didn't start sounding "Jazzy" until you got hip to these alternate scales? What where you playing before then? Non-alternate scales? Did you ever take a more chordal approach?

Just say no to scales. :D Chords, smaller pool of notes, with a better relationship to the harmony and melody of a majority of tunes.

So, you're saying that you didn't start sounding "Jazzy" until you got hip to these alternate scales? What where you playing before then? Non-alternate scales? Did you ever take a more chordal approach?



Well that's the whole point - before that I was just playing chord tones with maybe a few passing chromatic notes and I could play solos like this - but they didn't sound anything like what I heard the Jazz pros doing.

But when my Jazz teacher started to mention things like diminished whole tone half tone scales etc. etc. - then I could actualy hear and play a different sound that I hadn't come across in 25 - 30 years of my own improvising and playing bass - and that's what I now think of as a "Jazzy" sound!

Wow, a mind boggling thread indeed

You know when someone whistles a melody, like just makes it up on the spot. Well you can always respond to it with a melody naturally in some fashion, right? I always figured that's what improvising music should be like - and probably is like on a very basic level for everyone once in a blue moon when all that baggage is dropped?

Now I know this isnt jazz, I dont have the skills, the ear or the knowledge for it, but I prefer to listen to something before I write a bassline for it, so the part comes from my mind rather than from my fingers. Often that doesn't happen, but that's another story...

From what I've read here it sounds like you're talking about ways of preventing the physical aspect of playing an instrument getting between your music and playing your music. I.e. I'm seeing learning scales over chords is a physical aspect of playing, as a tool.

The thing I dont understand (and there's probably a good reason for that), is what is wrong with experimenting with certain notes, scales, chords, whatever in certain scenarios to help you learn and hear what they sound like?
I always thought the point of practicing scales, chords, etc, etc was so that you automatically connected sounds in your head with your fingers and instrument?

Obviously that means playing is going to be based on a conscious decision for many years, so you hear the notes you want to play, but have to consider the theory to play them... but surely that's part and parcel of development? Surley everyone starts off somewhat mechanical in this fashion?

Ed, you say that you went down that path, as per Bruce's diminished scale over X7 example, but that you reached a dead end. Are you absolutely sure that you didnt have to just go through that stage before you got where you are now?

I dont know why I'm asking really? Christ, just reading this thread makes me want to shrivel up and disappear! :rolleyes:

H

Just say no to scales. :D Chords, smaller pool of notes, with a better relationship to the harmony and melody of a majority of tunes.

I know we've all been down this road before, but I really can't agree with this. If you "just say no" to chord scales, I think you should "just say YES" to larger tonal centers. If the ultimate goal is to play what you hear, what if you start "hearing" that there are other notes you might want to play between the chord tones, as exemplified by almost every melody that exists in jazz? If you are aware of large scale tonal centers, then you will have both the chord tones (the stepping stones) and the non chord tones (A.K.A. "color tones", or the grass between the stepping stones) at your disposal to draw melodies from. How many melodies contain only chord tones? I'm not talking about what falls on the strong beats only, but the sum total.

I know we've all been down this road before, but I really can't agree with this. If you "just say no" to chord scales, I think you should "just say YES" to larger tonal centers. If the ultimate goal is to play what you hear, what if you start "hearing" that there are other notes you might want to play between the chord tones, as exemplified by almost every melody that exists in jazz? If you are aware of large scale tonal centers, then you will have both the chord tones (the stepping stones) and the non chord tones (A.K.A. "color tones", or the grass between the stepping stones) at your disposal to draw melodies from. How many melodies contain only chord tones? I'm not talking about what falls on the strong beats only, but the sum total.


I agree entirely Chris - part of the analysis of tunes I was talking about is looking at the melody and seeing what scales it suggests, in conjunction with the chord sequence - so if the chord sequence is ambiguous about what scale is appropriate in places - then what does the melody tell you? Nearly always, there is a hint at a particular scale in the melody - but if there isn't - that's important infomation to know as well!

Of course the ultimate aim is to hear this - but unless you are "magically blessed" , you have to have some path to understanding what is available to you and how to derive it, from study of existing tunes and chord sequences ?

Hi folks-
Not to sound like I can play or anything......Just an idea I think is relevant-One of the piano players I gig with is studying with Hal Galper. One of the things I picked up from him is eventually thinking of every chord as a dominant chord(usually the chord type that can have the most tension) when soloing, so there are basically no "wrong" notes just tension tones, and resolving tones(roots, 3rd and 7ths). That way, you can always be thinking of #4's, b5's, #5's, b9's, #9's, #11's, b13'ths etc. When I hear people solo using only the "nice" chord tones, it sounds uninteresting......vanilla if you will. Try starting your solo with an Eb over the Am7 of Autumn leaves for some "mint chocolate chip"...or a Bb for some "rocky road." An effective solo incorporates tension and release.......just listen to Miles play those b5's...you'd never know they were "wrong." I'd recommend that every bass player play through and analyze Charlie Parker's Omnibook(I'm still tryin' to get through it). Also, Volker Nahrmann has a book with Oscar Pettiford solos that is great too. Hope this helps.
-Del

There's just too much to deal with here, so I'm just going to stop.


I think I would like to start speaking French though. I've heard that you can use words like vous and merde and manger, could someone explain some of the logic behind this? and finally, is there some simple formula for knowing which of these words are available when speaking to French people?

There's just too much to deal with here, so I'm just going to stop.


That's too bad, cause there's still a lot of good stuff in this thread.

There's just too much to deal with here, so I'm just going to stop.


I think I would like to start speaking French though. I've heard that you can use words like vous and merde and manger, could someone explain some of the logic behind this? and finally, is there some simple formula for knowing which of these words are available when speaking to French people?

The simple forumula is to go to France and hook up with a hot madamoiselle and take some lessons. In a year or so you'll be sleeping, eating and speaking french. :D

The simple forumula is to go to France and hook up with a hot madamoiselle and take some lessons. In a year or so you'll be sleeping, eating and speaking french. :D


But I've been taking a class and they assure me that all I really need to do is say La plume de ma tante. Are you saying that they are wrong? That this is somehow not French?

I don't know who or what this madamoiselle you speak of is, but all I have to say is la plume de ma tante!

And I don't understand why everybody is coming down on me for saying that, no one is taking you to task for that madamoiselle thing!

I agree entirely Chris - part of the analysis of tunes I was talking about is looking at the melody and seeing what scales it suggests, in conjunction with the chord sequence - so if the chord sequence is ambiguous about what scale is appropriate in places - then what does the melody tell you? Nearly always, there is a hint at a particular scale in the melody - but if there isn't - that's important infomation to know as well!


I agree to an extent, but when I say "tonalities", it's not quite the same thing as saying "chord scales". The notion of "chord scales" implies more than I wish to by saying "tonality" - namely, it attaches too much importance on the root of each particular chord. I'd like to explain in more detail, but it will have to wait as the schedule doesn't allow it at the moment.

Re: treating each chord as a dominant when soloing so you can play loads of altered tones? Surely that will just give you a solo based on harmony that bears little or no resemblance to the actual song? :confused: You might as well just play random notes surely? I can do that! :D

I agree to an extent, but when I say "tonalities", it's not quite the same thing as saying "chord scales". The notion of "chord scales" implies more than I wish to by saying "tonality" - namely, it attaches too much importance on the root of each particular chord. I'd like to explain in more detail, but it will have to wait as the schedule doesn't allow it at the moment.

OK - I am starting to realise that there is this concept of "chord scales" (that I've never heard of, as such) that is frowned upon and I may have said something which sounds similar - although I never intended this!! ;)

I will try to be more careful with my choice of words in future!!

I realise that I write things as if everybody knows what I'm talking about as all the Jazz educators I have met in the UK, say similar things - whereas, I can see that there is a (slightly?) different language used in the US - quelle surprise!! :D

OK - I am starting to realise that there is this concept of "chord scales" (that I've never heard of, as such) that is frowned upon and I may have said something which sounds similar - although I never intended this!!

So is this saying that the idea of seeing a chord as tied to a bunch of scales, and vice versa, is musically limiting?

I.e. "When I see Major I play Ionian or Lydian".

So should you just think of the notes to use in that context, rather than scale = chord?

I'm not sure I can grasp this?! :hmm:

OK - I am starting to realise that there is this concept of "chord scales" (that I've never heard of, as such) that is frowned upon and I may have said something which sounds similar - although I never intended this!! ;)

I will try to be more careful with my choice of words in future!!

I realise that I write things as if everybody knows what I'm talking about as all the Jazz educators I have met in the UK, say similar things - whereas, I can see that there is a (slightly?) different language used in the US - quelle surprise!! :D


BRUCE - Zut alors! Toute le fenetre du Mercredi dans sur le table vivante du orange. Zut aussi. Le poisson est zut, mais le bois c'est vraiment le pomme. Comprenez?

Il faut suffrir pour être belle - plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose!! ;)

(PS. I spotted the bum notes - de l'orange, la fenêtre!! :hmm: )

Il faut suffrir pour être belle - plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose!! ;)

(PS. I spotted the bum notes - de l'orange, la fenêtre!! :hmm: )


BLOOSE - they're ALL bum notes, it's just that some of them are actual French words. Just like the notes of a diminsihed scale will work over a V7 chord. But if you are not hearing the polytonality implied, if you are not hearing the notes of the diminished chord relating to the line you have going on then none of the notes have any meaning. and just like me taking a bunch of French words and

know and banging them into a sentence in the right order (the verbs and nouns in approximately the right places) it might "sound French" to somebody who doesn't speak French. But to somebody who actually speaks and understadns French, I haven't actually said anything.
Am I communicating this concept yet?
That "All Wednesday's windows are on the living orange table" doesn't actually mean anything? And, if all I am doing is grabbing French words and banging them into a sentence with no idea of what they mean, much like a player who does not yet clearly hear chord function and relationship grabbing notes that are "supposed" to work, I do not stand even the remotest chance of saying what it is I really want to say?


Please tell me that's clear. I don't know how to say it any plainer than that.

I did spend a modest amount of time looking for "conveniently deleted" posts and was able to find quite a large number (quoted in other folks posts) they say EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what you seem to be reading when I type. Which leads me to beleive that you are kind of hearing what you want to hear, rather than what I'm saying. The recollections of others (in response to my query) would seem to be supportive of my contention.

TWIZ - I know it seems like the conversation got deep pretty quick, but it's a deep subject. As you seem to know, when you say that it's "massively complicated". There are good ways to get started and I know what worked for me and what didn't. That's why I offer the advice I do.

All improvising a line or solo over changes is is - you try to play the "melodies" you create in your head as you play the song. It's best to stay "in the moment" and not try to work up stuff to bring in, but starting out that may be the approach you have to use. I don't really remember you talking about the practical side of this, what are you looking to do? Sit in at the local club, got a 6 night a week staedy gig starting tomorrow, have an 8 bar solo in a chart your high school band is doing? We can get more focused on what it is. Advice for an 8 bar solo in a big band chart can be handled a lot differently than having to improvise lines and solos for a 5 hour trio gig.

So is this saying that the idea of seeing a chord as tied to a bunch of scales, and vice versa, is musically limiting?

I.e. "When I see Major I play Ionian or Lydian".

So should you just think of the notes to use in that context, rather than scale = chord?

I'm not sure I can grasp this?! :hmm:

The concept of "chord scales" is a teaching device designed to help beginners understand what their most basic note choices are in relation to any given chord at any given time. When you learn by this method, you are told things like, "When you see a Dmi7 chord, you can play a Dorian minor scale and it will work". There are times when, as a teacher, it is necessary to begin with statements like this just to get somebody on the path - like when you're teaching a summer workshop and you've only got five days to run an ensemble and you're trying to do damage control with a student who keeps stepping all over his Johnson notewise when trying to play on "So What". But beyond very elementary situations like this, more depth needs to be gone into on this subject, or else students may start walking around thinking, "When I see any mi7 chord, I'm supposed to play a Dorian scale", which is pure unmitigated horse****.

The question becomes, how does one teach context? The answer, of course, is contextually (i.e. - part of it is "troubleshooting" when problems arise along the path of the student, and the other part is teaching concept over a long period of time). There is no quick fix for this one.

But to get back to the basic point, the reasons I think the idea of "chord scales" is jive are the following:

1) Students taught this way tend to jump to the root of each scale in each measure, which has nothing to do with building a melody.

2) When they get more advanced, they tend to try to create a melody when they are comfortable with a set of changes, then jump back to the root the moment a "chord scale" they are unfamiliar with comes up, leading to the dreaded and often chronic condition called Melodious Interruptus, which has no known cure other than listening to a ****load of great records, practicing 5 hours a day, and playing with great players every night, which few can afford.

3) Thinking of "chord scales" causes students to sectionalize tunes unnecessarily. If you have 32 chords in a tune, that's 32 THOUGHTS times (usually) seven different notes per scale, which if my math hasn't totally left me equals 224 thoughts per chorus BEFORE you begin the task of trying to make music, which is difficult enough as it is. And many tunes have more than one chord per bar, at least in certain places within the tune.


Most tunes contain only a few basic tonal centers. In my opinion (which is not Ed's opinion or Tom's opinion or Adrian's opinion, etc.), I think it's much more useful to begin by thinking of these and working to achieve more detail than by starting with 224 details and trying to achieve coherence. My favorite analogy for this, which I'm sure can be found in another thread, is the painting analogy: If you were trying to teach a child to paint, would you start by teaching them how to paint the perfect Mona Lisa smile with a fine brush using oil based paint, or give them some fingerpaints and let them start drawing very broad shapes and then refine them? I won't speak for anybody else, but I know which of these my kid is doing.

Next comes the question of, "but...but...you can't just tell somebody to meander around in Bb/Gminor all day while playing over "Autumn Leaves", cause that isn't jazz". My answer to that is, "neither is obsessing over what chord or scale tone to play instead of focusing on making a melody". I would start by working within the broad tonal area, limiting yourself to a basic set of notes at first, and then notice how each note sounds different every time the chord changes. That same Eb that sounded so right over the Cmi and F7 chords sounds pretty bogus over the Bb chord if you stay on it, right? What does your ear want to do with that? Are there any notes that sound decent over the whole progression in the "A" section"? If so, you might want to remember those as a kind of "home base" to move away from and return to. Can you make interesting rhythmic motives (motifs for the Brits) within this overall tonality? Good. Do that for awhile. Then notice how certain tones of this overall tonality pull your ear toward them when certain chords are sounding. Next, see if you can play melodically and land on one of these "magnetic" tones in a strong point in your line from time to time, and notice how that seems to "center" your line, making it sound more like the melody does.

Next, practice landing on these "magnetic" notes more often, so that you can do it regularly if you desire. You might try a few exercises like connecting chord tones linearly, which is what the melody does:


Bb..C...D...Eb..F...G...A...Bb - - ->(Cmi7)
Bb..C...D...Eb..F...G...A...Bb - - ->(F7)
Bb..C...D...Eb..F...G...A...Bb - - ->(Bbma7)
Bb..C...D...Eb..F...G...A...Bb - - ->(EbMa7)
Bb..C...D...Eb..F...G...A...Bb - - ->(Ami7b5)
Bb..C...D...Eb..F#.G...A...Bb - - ->(D7)
Bb..C...D...Eb..F...G...A...Bb - - ->(Gmi7)


(Because of the limitations of the TB software, the above is formatted so that it needs to be read vertically rather than horizontally)


When you look at the changes in this way, you can see more clearly how all of the elements come into play. Yes, the tune IS built on Bb/Gmi, and yes, each of those chords DOES contain chord tones which are "stronger" in the moment than the color tones, but it all works together within the overal tonality, not in spite of it. Looking at it like this, try to connect chord tones from one chord to the next closest available chord tone in the next chord. How does that sound? Try connecting chord tones in a linear fashion every which way you can think of - it's what the melody does (Eb - D - C - Bb). Next, when the sound of the "magnetic" chordtones is in your ear, embellish your line using both chord tones and non-chord tones in the general area. Keep doing this until you feel that you are creating a melody.

Let me know if any of this helps make the concept clearer.

Great post Chris - so nobody has ever thrown the term "Chord Scale method" at me and I now know to avoid anything tha sounds like it!!

I also appreciate what you are saying about context - this is exactly what I get with my regular Jazz classes and it is difficult to take these ideas out of context to something like TB - without writing vast tomes... as you have!! ;)

I write as I speak around here, like a normal conversation - but this subject really needs a thorough explanation like your post !! :)

Please tell me that's clear. I don't know how to say it any plainer than that.

Mais oui - mon ami - tout comprendre!! ;)

"(motifs for the Brits)"

Chris, I think it's very insensitive of you to bring something like this up, given the state of British dental care.

I'm surprised at you.

"(motifs for the Brits)"

Chris, I think it's very insensitive of you to bring something like this up, given the state of British dental care.

I'm surprised at you.

Yeah - I wonder what his motive was? :D

"(motifs for the Brits)"

Chris, I think it's very insensitive of you to bring something like this up, given the state of British dental care.

I'm surprised at you.

Please. Being from Bum*** Georgia, you of all people should know that I, being from Kentucky, am in no position to make any such remark about dental care anywhere else in the world. I meant no such disrespect....indeed, it is your assertion that I meant any disrespect toward our Limey brethren that is toothless.

Please. Being from Bum*** Georgia, you of all people should know that I, being from Kentucky, am in no position to make any such remark about dental care anywhere else in the world. I meant no such disrespect....indeed, it is your assertion that I meant any disrespect toward our Limey brethren that is toothless.

No tooth to the rumour, hunh.

Y'all must know the basic pick-up line in the Georgia club scene: "Nice tooth."

Bb..C...D...Eb..F...G...A...Bb - - ->(Ami7b5)
Bb..C...D...Eb..F#.G...A...Bb - - ->(D7)



First of all, thanks very much Chris.

I'm not clear on the logic behind these scales. How does Bb, rather than B natural, fall within Ami7b5, and both Bb and Eb, rather than B and E natural, fall within D7? I noticed that you singled out F# for D7, which does makes sense to me.

Not that I would complain if someone did use Bb or Eb anyway...

Thanks,
Johnny

First of all, thanks very much Chris.

I'm not clear on the logic behind these scales. How does Bb, rather than B natural, fall within Ami7b5, and both Bb and Eb, rather than B and E natural, fall within D7? I noticed that you singled out F# for D7, which does makes sense to me.

Not that I would complain if someone did use Bb or Eb anyway...

Thanks,
Johnny

Hmmm.... Well...the most "in" scale you can use on Am7b5 is the locrian scale, which is the 7th mode of the major scale (in this case Bb major). It's very possible to use natural B on this scale too instead (or along with) B flat. That scale would be 6th mode of C Melodic Minor.

As for the D7, you must realize that the chord is usually altered when resoloving to a minor chord (like D7 to Gm). So that chord would be something like D7b9 or D7 alt. and neither of those chords include a natural B or E (those degrees are altered).

Sorry if this was confusing, maybe someone else can clear up in an understandable way.

/lovebown

First of all, thanks very much Chris.

I'm not clear on the logic behind these scales. How does Bb, rather than B natural, fall within Ami7b5, and both Bb and Eb, rather than B and E natural, fall within D7? I noticed that you singled out F# for D7, which does makes sense to me.

Not that I would complain if someone did use Bb or Eb anyway...

Thanks,
Johnny

You see, that's what i'm talking about, cause as SOON as you start talking about chord scales (and all that means BRUCE is picking a specific scale to play over a chord change) th ewhole idea of function and continuity go right out the window. Which DURRL says, but in a differnt way from me. Apparently he has mo teef and can talk faster (they must be smaller) ahem.

ANYWAY, JohnnyL, take your Bb major scale and write it out. Over and over

Bb C D Eb F G A Bb C D Eb F G A Bb C D Eb

now build a chord starting on A by stacking thirds (be they major or minor)

Bb C D Eb F G A Bb C D Eb F G A Bb C

right? So you get A C Eb G or A minor seventh flat 5 (also know as the half diminished).

But are you treating this as the vii7b5 in Bb or as the ii7b5 of V in Bb? Does the fact that it can function as both open any possibilities to you?

But over and above alla this, what are you hearing going on? It's not "learning the rules so you can break tehm" it's actually hearing where an idea is going so that EVEN IF the notes are not "supposed" to work they work in the way you are hearing your line, where it's heading .

You see, that's what i'm talking about, cause as SOON as you start talking about chord scales (and all that means BRUCE is picking a specific scale to play over a chord change) th ewhole idea of function and continuity go right out the window. Which DURRL says, but in a differnt way from me. Apparently he has mo teef and can talk faster (they must be smaller) ahem.

ANYWAY, JohnnyL, take your Bb major scale and write it out. Over and over

Bb C D Eb F G A Bb C D Eb F G A Bb C D Eb

now build a chord starting on A by stacking thirds (be they major or minor)

Bb C D Eb F G A Bb C D Eb F G A Bb C

right? So you get A C Eb G or A minor seventh flat 5 (also know as the half diminished).

But are you treating this as the vii7b5 in Bb or as the ii7b5 of V in Bb? Does the fact that it can function as both open any possibilities to you?

But over and above alla this, what are you hearing going on? It's not "learning the rules so you can break tehm" it's actually hearing where an idea is going so that EVEN IF the notes are not "supposed" to work they work in the way you are hearing your line, where it's heading .


Sure fucntional theory is really useful and it's something any jazz musician should know, but I personally have found knowing the scales that "go with" particular chords quite useful...of course knowing which scales go with which chords means having an understanding of function (knowing whether Dm7 is ii or iii or vi etc.)

Working on diffrent scale on diffrent chords can also very much open up your hearing and make you try new things. If you want to be able to hear anything over a Bb7 altered you probably have to do some work with the altered scale over the dominant chord.

There are plenty of excercises to be made out of scales on harmony. Getting the sound of the chord and scale is to me very essential in being able to make out melodies and meaningful ideas out of it all.

One thing I like to do a lot is to sit down at the piano, play a chord...say Am7b5 and just play either all the intervals in a particular scale , or all 12 tones in succession and try to get that particular note into my hearing, and what it sounds like to me. My particular experience is that in order to EVER hear anything that includes the natural 2 on a m7b5 you have to use it, and listen to it.

/lovebown

The concept of "chord scales" is a teaching device designed to help beginners understand what their most basic note choices are in relation to any given chord at any given time. When you learn by this method, you are told things like, "When you see a Dmi7 chord, you can play a Dorian minor scale and it will work". There are times when, as a teacher, it is necessary to begin with statements like this just to get somebody on the path - like when you're teaching a summer workshop and you've only got five days to run an ensemble and you're trying to do damage control with a student who keeps stepping all over his Johnson notewise when trying to play on "So What". But beyond very elementary situations like this, more depth needs to be gone into on this subject, or else students may start walking around thinking, "When I see any mi7 chord, I'm supposed to play a Dorian scale", which is pure unmitigated horse****.


Wouldn't it be easier to get the person on the path with less notes i.e. 4 instead of 7? Why suggest a dorian scale when there's tons of useful stuff in the 4 notes that comprise the chord? Wouldn't root, 1st, 2nd, 3rd inversions of a chord be a more worthwhile thing to have in your hands than a dorian scale?

Well, one of these days, I have to bite the bullet and write my long essay on why I disagree with the right onnable gentleman from Queens/Georgia, and also agree with him, and why I disagree with the right onnable gentleman from KinTUCKy, and also agree with him, etc. What works for me works for me. I recommend it for everybody, but prescribe it to no one, because everything we take in passes through our own filters.
This is coming from my last few years studying the Alexander Technique. Explaining AT is virtually impossible, and I will spare everyone that. But basically, most of the posts are effect-oriented as opposed to cause-oriented, and in my training, when primary control (the essential cause) is restored, the right thing does itself. Applying this to the discussion at hand, what leads to better jazz solos also leads to better sight reading Beethoven, etc.
I don't have alot of time these days, and I won't be able to respond to whatever I stir up.
More, later.

Thanks too Ed. That's pretty cool.

Have faith that you're not wasting time telling the less knowledgeable among us (and me, of course) what those carefully placed red colors mean in Chris's post and that one can treat the the vii7b5 in Bb also as the ii7b5 of V in Bb.

I do think most folks here appreciate this chord because it sounds good both stand-alone as well as underneath a good melody, not simply because the system used to explain what is happening can also be used to hold some kind of conversation without caring what the music will sound like.

However, I'm not sure that the folks who do want to put notes and rhythms together in this manner deserve contempt either. Some things are born from acquired tastes, and they occasionally turn out to be quite good things...

Wouldn't it be easier to get the person on the path with less notes i.e. 4 instead of 7? Why suggest a dorian scale when there's tons of useful stuff in the 4 notes that comprise the chord? Wouldn't root, 1st, 2nd, 3rd inversions of a chord be a more worthwhile thing to have in your hands than a dorian scale?

To some, it would. To me, it seems limiting - Try to play the bass melody to "So What" with only chord tones, and you'll see what I mean. Or the melody to "Impressions". Or the melody to just about any other tune I can think of that wasn't written for a valveless brass instrument. It's only my opinion, but if I want to start someone on the path to soloing melodically, I want them to have the materials that comprise most melodies at hand.

Thanks too Ed. That's pretty cool.

Have faith that you're not wasting time telling the less knowledgeable among us (and me, of course) what those carefully placed red colors mean in Chris's post and that one can treat the the vii7b5 in Bb also as the ii7b5 of V in Bb.


Before this gets too confusing, I think Mr. PUKESPRAY meant to write that Ami7b5 can also function as the ii-7b5 of V in Gminor, not Bb. He probably got distracted by his tooth or something.

And I don't mean to insist that this is THE BEST or ONLY WAY to look at the issue of chord tones and non-chord tones - it's just what I do in my head and ear intuitively when I'm working on a new set of changes, and what I use to help some of my students think of matters like this. The greater issue is of course much more complicated and subjective. This kind of thing is just what works for me. I hope that a person or two who happens to read it here may eventually find it useful.

Before this gets too confusing, I think Mr. PUKESPRAY meant to write that Ami7b5 can also function as the ii-7b5 of V in Gminor, not Bb.
And it is also the basis of the opening of Blue Lou, where it is the ii-7b5 going to V7 in G major. And in inversion, it is a ivm6 going to V7, a device used in Stella, among hundreds of others

This is not offered to contradict Ed's point. It was just my turn to be precious. I haven't posted in a while.

He probably got distracted by his tooth or something.

Is this why my mom warned me not to talk to strangers?

[Originally posted by twizzle inna fashizzle nizzle dizzle]perhaps i'm just missing something here but, i don't see why it isn't possible to describe several chordal tones to play over the common changes.
I was wondering when this forum was going to have some threads you can really sink your teeth into. Lots of great questions and replies. I was sucked into the real world for a coupla days, so I'm just catching up. It is true what many have said, that learning some theory won't enable you to play. But the way I see it, we all absorb it in some fashion on our way to learning how to play, whether it's intuitively, or our individual convoluted way of understanding how things work, or you read it in a book, or somebody explains it to you. But let's put all that aside one time and just answer the dood's question, eh?
playing a diminished chord one HALF step above a 7th is an appropriate substitute lick, so perhaps you chould play an Eb diminished over the first two measures...is this logic correct? Don't concern yourself with "substitute licks" before you have any idea how to make the changes. This device will produce a sound that is somewhat outside of the changes, and I feel very strongly that you must first learn how to hear and play inside of the changes. If you must know, the logic behind this "trick" is as follows.

A) The ii chord and the V chord in any key are really just different versions of the same thing. Put another way, the ii chord is the suspended version of the V chord.

B) As such, these chords are essentially interchangable.

C) Instead of playing one bar of each, play two bars of the V chord.

D) Alter the V chord so it has a b9, and now your Eb diminished arpeggio "fits" over the D7 chord because it comprises the b9, 3rd, 5th, and 7th.

Now, forget eveything you just read, because you're not ready to use that information.

i have been told that a ii7 to V change such as the Am7 to D7 in autumn leaves, is ok for playing the am7 or d7 chordal tones over it.
You may have been told something akin to this, but your language is vague and leads me to believe that you misinterpreted. In your original post, you asked (i'm paraphrasing) "Do I have to change gears every bar and think of a new scale for each chord change?" The answer is eventually yes, but it is not as difficult as it sounds. Chris, I don't know where you got the idea that I disagree with the concept of playing tonalities, but anyway I'm probably rewording what you have already posted. So here goes.

Twiz, think of the first 4 changes as the key of G major. Play anything at all from the G major scale. It will likely sound generic, and not really outline the sound of each chord, but you're more apt to come up with something melodic by choosing notes from one scale over the course of 4 measures than if you try to play 4 different arpeggios. I don't recommend you rely on this method for the rest of your days. It is just a way to get you to hear the overall tonality of larger sections, and a way to get you playing over tunes without having to think so much.

Think of the next 4 changes as the key of E minor. Which is not that much different from Gmajor. Play something from the E harmonic minor scale. This is not really the most accurate scale for the F#-7b5 or the B7, but again it puts your ear in touch with the tonal center and frees up your mind from too much "what next?" Once you are reasonably comfortable doing this, you can begin to refine your note choices based on more specific guidelines.

So for now, we have:
A section:
Bars 1-4: G Major
Bars 5-8: e minor
(repeat)
Bridge:
Bars 17-20: e minor
Bars 21-24: G Major
Last A:
Bars 25-32: e minor

Try this out and let me know what you think.

Don't concern yourself with "substitute licks" before you have any idea how to make the changes. ......If you must know, the logic behind this "trick" is as follows......


Now, forget eveything you just read, because you're not ready to use that information.

Give that man a Kewpie doll! Perfect answer.


i have been told that a ii7 to V change such as the Am7 to D7 in autumn leaves, is ok for playing the am7 or d7 chordal tones over it.
You may have been told something akin to this, but your language is vague and leads me to believe that you misinterpreted. In your original post, you asked (i'm paraphrasing) "Do I have to change gears every bar and think of a new scale for each chord change?" The answer is eventually yes, but it is not as difficult as it sounds.

I don't even like to think of it as "changing gears", but to take that analogy a bit further, it's like driving a stick shift - at first, you stall the car out every time you try to start off from a red light, but once you get used to how a clutch works, it's actually easier than driving an automatic. In other words, it becomes second nature and makes you one with the vehicle.

Chris, I don't know where you got the idea that I disagree with the concept of playing tonalities, but anyway I'm probably rewording what you have already posted.

I didn't mean to single you out as disagreeing - only to say that what I was about to post was only representing my own view as opposed to some universally accepted procedure. No slight intended. :)

Twiz, think of the first 4 changes as the key of G major. Play anything at all from the G major scale. It will likely sound generic, and not really outline the sound of each chord, but you're more apt to come up with something melodic by choosing notes from one scale over the course of 4 measures than if you try to play 4 different arpeggios. I don't recommend you rely on this method for the rest of your days. It is just a way to get you to hear the overall tonality of larger sections, and a way to get you playing over tunes without having to think so much.

DINGDINGDING!!! We have a winner!

Seriously, I know that some disagree with this kind of thinking, and that's cool.

Oh, and TWIZZARD OF OZ - be aware that CUE BALL is describing "Autumn Leaves" in the Key of G major/Eminor, whereas I and several others were decribing the tune in the key of BbMajor/Gminor. Both are common keys to play that tune in. I'll amend Q's post quoted below to show both keys, since I'm not clear on which key you have the tune in on your copy.



So for now, we have:
A section:
Bars 1-4: G Major - - -> (Bb Major)
Bars 5-8: e minor - - -> (G Minor)
(repeat)
Bridge:
Bars 17-20: e minor - - -> (G Minor)
Bars 21-24: G Major - - -> (Bb Major)
Last A:
Bars 25-32: e minor - - -> (G Minor)

Try this out and let me know what you think.

To some, it would. To me, it seems limiting - Try to play the bass melody to "So What" with only chord tones, and you'll see what I mean. Or the melody to "Impressions". Or the melody to just about any other tune I can think of that wasn't written for a valveless brass instrument. It's only my opinion, but if I want to start someone on the path to soloing melodically, I want them to have the materials that comprise most melodies at hand.

Try playing the melody to "So What" without the chord tones, out of the 6 notes in the line only 2 are non chord tones. The line begin and ends on a chord tone and the longest notes are all chord tones.

Take "All The Things You Are", in almost every bar the melody note is the third of the chord notated. "All of Me" the majority of notes are chord tones, especially the long notes, same thing with "How High The Moon".

Try playing the melody to "So What" without the chord tones, out of the 6 notes in the line only 2 are non chord tones. The line begin and ends on a chord tone and the longest notes are all chord tones.

Granted. But without all of the notes, it's not the same melody, is it? The English language consists of a much higher percentage of consonants than vowels...wld y sggst gttng rd f th vwls s wll whn tchng chldrn t rd?

Take "All The Things You Are", in almost every bar the melody note is the third of the chord notated. "All of Me" the majority of notes are chord tones, especially the long notes, same thing with "How High The Moon".

Yes, I'm aware of that. Let me rephrase the question: would you show up at a gig and play melodies with only chord tones? A Jam session even? I wouldn't even dream of it. No one is debating the importance of chord tones to melodies - the issue is whether to teach students to play melodically using all of the resources that melodies use, or only some of them. Personally, I think it's a no-brainer, but not everyone feels that way.

And I would think of "How High the Moon" as an example FOR using NCT's in education: "Some-where (there's MU)-sic".....take away the NCT's (in parentheses), and it sounds like the song is about somebody looking for a place to throw up. :D

You see, that's what i'm talking about, cause as SOON as you start talking about chord scales (and all that means BRUCE is picking a specific scale to play over a chord change) th ewhole idea of function and continuity go right out the window. .

Well what I was saying (or at least trying to) was that the big revelation for me, was discovering that there are often many different scales that you could play and not just one - and that each of these choices gives you differing levels of dissonance - so you can have light and shade in your solos.

My experience was that - just by listening, I could easily infer the more consonant choices of scale or tonal center(sic) as Chris says and would have been happy playing these for many years - as I had done in rock groups for nearly 3 decades!!

But my Jazz teacher showing how different scale choices in different places in the functional harmony could have a big impact on the "sound" of your solo and what colours were available to you.

This was a revelation to me as it suddenly opened up the "sound of Jazz" - something that was never available to me in previous situations - no matter how freely I improvised and created tunes in this manner!

the big revelation for me, was discovering that there are often many different scales that you could play and not just one - and that each of these choices gives you differing levels of dissonance - so you can have light and shade in your solos....But my Jazz teacher showing how different scale choices in different places in the functional harmony could have a big impact on the "sound" of your solo and what colours were available to you. ...This was a revelation to me as it suddenly opened up the "sound of Jazz"
This is what Michael Moore did with me. I subscribe to this fully.

I agree in principle with most of the last two posts, with the caveat that I don't think of the extra colors available as "scales" exactly, but rather other possible note-choices that pull against the implied "inside" sound, which is always subliminally present. What I posted before was my conception of the most "inside" version of the tonality of the tune in question... a jumping off point.

Now everybody's agreeing with me - there must be something wrong!! ;)

It certainly seems to show up the limitations of the medium anyway and how easy it is to be misunderstood - even when, like me , you think you are trying as hard as you can, to express yourself as clearly as possible! :hmm:

Now everybody's agreeing with me - there must be something wrong!! ;)

It certainly seems to show up the limitations of the medium anyway and how easy it is to be misunderstood - even when, like me , you think you are trying as hard as you can, to express yourself as clearly as possible! :hmm:

I think it's obvious that a lot of the time on this forum people change their beliefs when a "highly regarded" forum member comes in and says something. I've seen it before...

/lovebown

...key of BbMajor/Gminor...

Now I think I get it. I understand, though, that there are several types of minor scales - harmonic minor, melodic minor, natural(?) minor. When one drops down a minor 3rd and plays that scale with the same notes as the major scale, which minor scale is this, and how do the other minor scales listed relate (if at all) to this scale?

Now everybody's agreeing with me - there must be something wrong!! ;)

It certainly seems to show up the limitations of the medium anyway and how easy it is to be misunderstood - even when, like me , you think you are trying as hard as you can, to express yourself as clearly as possible! :hmm:


Not everybody.

I think somebody earlier had asked if I thought my perspective was a little skewed because I got hooked up with Joe after I'd been playing for awhile. well, sure, maybe. But Joe has a lot of students at varying skill levels (several of which are farther along than me) and I can say that every one of the students that puts the time in, from beginner to whatever, reaches the point that they are improvising lines built on what they hear, what is in their "everyday" vocabulary and do not rely on licks or notes "plugged in" from material that is not in their ears.

So, there's a wealth of approach here. All I can speak to is my own personal experience and my own personal experience is that I personally did not get a handle on soloing through changes, walking a line that unfolded like a melody and reaching a place where playing with other people was more an act of communication than a stage play where I was trying to insert my lines without being able to understand what I was saying until I abandoned this idea of "what can I play over this change" and really started working on what I was hearing, both internally and externally.

I also am of the opinion that, had I hooked up with Joe instead of Berklee back in 82, my level of communication, interaction, time/feel, harmonic depth etc etc would be 20 years ahead of where I am right now. And that's kind of overwhelming.

I'm trying to grasp how this approach works.....

So what you're saying is - rather than looking at different scales/tonal centres and thinking about practicing how you can fit them into solos...
It's better to listen to how previous Jazz musicians have used these scales/ideas/concepts until you can hear them as sounds, know why they were used and can play them without thinking of them as scales/tonals centres etc. ?

I think I have had problems with this myself - as I will get something in my head and think I have it cracked - but then I get sidetracked on some work-related project for several weeks and when I come back, I am at square one again!! :(

I'm trying to grasp how this approach works.....

So what you're saying is - rather than looking at different scales/tonal centres and thinking about practicing how you can fit them into solos...
It's better to listen to how previous Jazz musicians have used these scales/ideas/concepts until you can hear them as sounds, know why they were used and can play them without thinking of them as scales/tonals centres etc. ?

I think I have had problems with this myself - as I will get something in my head and think I have it cracked - but then I get sidetracked on some work-related project for several weeks and when I come back, I am at square one again!! :(

No, that's not what I am saying at all. What I am saying is work on hearing the chords, hearing the melody, hearing the time and working on some specific improvisational exercises that I have outlined in other threads. This gets you to a point where you not only hear the chords, you hear a line that moves through the chords, you hear it as specific discrete pitches that are part of a whole. You hear it as specific notes with a specific rhythmic placement.
Just like listening to a Pres solo, except it's you and it's in your head.


It's not like looking up a bunch of different words and practicing how you can fit them into a conversation, it's not like listening to a bunch of other people talk so that you can try to understand why they had a certain conversation. It's about saying what YOU want to say in a conversation YOU are having with people who are talking with YOU.
And they way you get to deeper conversational levels is NOT by just learning bigger words, it's by understanding deeper concepts AND having the vocabulary to express with a growing specificity what you understand.


As far as practice, well, yeah, you gotta do it every day. Even if it's only an hour, everyday is what get syou away from having to start over at square one with each practice session.

Now I think I get it. I understand, though, that there are several types of minor scales - harmonic minor, melodic minor, natural(?) minor. When one drops down a minor 3rd and plays that scale with the same notes as the major scale, which minor scale is this, and how do the other minor scales listed relate (if at all) to this scale?

If I understand your question correctly, you're talking about Relative Minor scales.

i.e. - CMa= C D E F G A B C
........Ami= A B C D E F G A

That's because these two scales are Modes of each other, much in the same way the words "Eat", "Ate", and "Tea" are modes of each other. In this case, the Minor Mode in question is the Aeolian Mode, a.k.a. "Natural Minor" or "Pure Minor".

Melodic Minor can be thought of in different ways, usually as it relates to other common scale forms. You could think of it as:

Major w/b3
Dorian mi w/ raised 7
Aeolian with raised 6 and 7, etc

Any way you think of it that gets you there is fine. Some people go to the trouble to learn all about the "Modes" of Melodic Minor. I don't, for reasons I have already outlined elsewhere.

Harmonic Minor is an artificial construction which attempts to account for the common usage of harmony in minor tonalities. Since the V chord in minor is usually Dominant (and therefore contains a raised 7th), the 7th of this "scale" is raised. Since the ii chord in minor is usually half-diminished, the iv chord is usually minor, and the (b)VI is usually Major, the lowered 6th degree is used. But there are plenty of exceptions.

When I need to think of minor "Scale forms", I relate everything back to Major and alter that:

Melodic = 1 2 b3 4 5 6 7 8
Dorian. = 1 2 b3 4 5 6 b7 8
Aeolian = 1 2 b3 4 5 b6 b7 8
Harmonic = 1 2 b3 4 5 b6 7 8

Hope this helps.

No, that's not what I am saying at all. What I am saying is work on hearing the chords, hearing the melody, hearing the time and working on some specific improvisational exercises that I have outlined in other threads. This gets you to a point where you not only hear the chords, you hear a line that moves through the chords, you hear it as specific discrete pitches that are part of a whole. You hear it as specific notes with a specific rhythmic placement.
Just like listening to a Pres solo, except it's you and it's in your head.


It's not like looking up a bunch of different words and practicing how you can fit them into a conversation, it's not like listening to a bunch of other people talk so that you can try to understand why they had a certain conversation. It's about saying what YOU want to say in a conversation YOU are having with people who are talking with YOU.
And they way you get to deeper conversational levels is NOT by just learning bigger words, it's by understanding deeper concepts AND having the vocabulary to express with a growing specificity what you understand.

.

I understand the second paragraph - it's just the first, that is still a bit of mystery to me - I can understand the kind of things that Chris is talking about in this thread...maybe I should be happy with that!!?? ;)

I understand the second paragraph - it's just the first, that is still a bit of mystery to me - I can understand the kind of things that Chris is talking about in this thread...maybe I should be happy with that!!?? ;)


In what way may I make it clearer? To me the second paragraph is just an analogy of what I was saying in the first paragraph.

What are you doing for ear training,what kind of work are you currently doing on chords?

Thanks guys for this great thread ! Some incredibly useful information!

I don't suppose someone could link me to a quick primer on these different modal tones and their uses (like why the heck people say D Dorian vs Locrian vs whatever) and when one matters over another?

Thanks guys for this great thread ! Some incredibly useful information!

I don't suppose someone could link me to a quick primer on these different modal tones and their uses (like why the heck people say D Dorian vs Locrian vs whatever) and when one matters over another?

Find any post by Jazzbo, then click on the link at the bottom. Ooh, wait a minute....you can also find NOSEBLOW'S excellent article Here (http://www.talkbass.com/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=31). Have at it. :)

In what way may I make it clearer? To me the second paragraph is just an analogy of what I was saying in the first paragraph.

What are you doing for ear training,what kind of work are you currently doing on chords?

I was amazed at the rate of contribution to this excellent thread but things are getting repeated and it's obvious some of the message isn't getting accross. Aqua Bed loves solos that say something and this is what he is adamant we should all apsirte to. This we aspire to by having such a command of our material we can choose what to play. No arguments so far I hope.

Now when I started out on the jazz trail and did the round of classes I rapidly got a little peed off. Stick a flat 9 on bar 5 of But not for Me I was instructed and it will sound great - use this scale that scale etc, and I wondered where the music had gone. In fact, I thought the music had been robbed from me. Now all you helpful TBers have come up with a million and one options to give people a choices but not much on how to say something musical. So after thinking about it here's my 2 penn'oth

I have (not here) often met the arrogant assumption that you just practise all this and it will come eventually if you're any good. Just listen, transcribe, practise and - well get darn frustrated - what do you give priority to? The stock tB answer to most things is get a teacher. Great - but that hasn't stopped confussion here has it?

So I think there are elements that need to be comtemplated more - and they are time rythmn and space. Chris, but not too many others alluded to it by mentioning motives, (which over in UK are what get you sent down for). Time sets the pulse and dictates begining and end of the piece. Rythm can cause tension and release. Harmony gives colour but also tension and release (and can imply rythm depending on alternation of consonant and dissonant note but ho hum).

You're saying something, so you're telling a story. It has a begining (amazing how so many start with a fab lick and then waffle) it has a middle climaxes 2/3 through maybe and pulled together at the end. Time is linear, it has to be so, this cannot be a novel where you put the end first or hop backwards and forwards because if you do no-one will ever know.

So its linear, it starts, builds then falls to a finish that tells the audience to clap. We're not talking free jazz here so you don't have tension all the time. You give yourself space to build. I like to relate the improv to the tune but that's up to you. In my book, it has to be a whole - one idea connects to the rest perhaps because there is simmilarity to the rythm or choice of notes. Don't use too many ideas - not necesarily because it will confuse you - because most audiences can't hear them as part of the same improv. In the middle of the improv try not to make it sound like you've ended - an easy trap to play a root at the end of four bars.

Clever stuff is displacing rythms accross four bar blocks and bar lines. One good way to start this is try seeing how long you can leave a gap and then if you can leave a gap and come in anywhere you choose. This is not a chordal thing, it's knowing where you are, how long you want to go on and at what point between middle and end you are (got more ideas to develop or draw it ot a close).

Can this be practised - darn well can - but make this your aim and stop worrying about the chord scale theory whilst playing. I say this on the basis that 1/ if you're out there it's too late to practise further and 2/ the person thinking of a whole solo, rather than all the licks they've learn't usually sounds the best regardless of an odd dodgy note. And this is the priority if you do an improv for others to hear.

Unfortunately this does not apply to many jazz classes where the teacher and in the UK the classical examination body, the Associated Board, wants to see you can put this scale there and insert a quote or too regardless of what you're feeling.

This takes me back to feeling robbed at jazz classes when I started out. Admittedly, I didn't have the tools (but I darn tried) but I decided what I felt about something and was determined for my solo to be a part of me (and have a begining middle and end). But after much praise of solos I hated and getting quite good at the chord scale malarchy I got to the stage where I felt like giving up.

So - be true to yourself - be in the groove and just luxuriate in the oportunities as you (and me of course) progresses - but don't wait to try to find your own voice - do it now. That means work on time - feel the pulse, know where you are - never loose the pulse in an improv. - but hey, we're bass players - this is a catch up area for all those foghorns out there.

But importantly - how do you feel - agitated (well I have gone on a bit long), happy, melocholy? Right, so thats what I'm building to - lets start somewhere simple and build to it - to harsh large intervals say, to a joyous rythm, to a plaintive minor sound and then end on a reprise thats darn cheesy - it tells everyone that you knew what you were doing (even if you winged it) because you came home to something recognisable. Cue applause and blue-note contract (in my dreams!).

Awesome. Thanks Chris, it helps quite a bit. Is it the melodic minor
that goes up one way and goes down the other? There's a Mozart #40
audition excerpt that uses one of the minor scales like this to show a
committee how well one does a spicatto, and it sounds really cool.

Awesome. Thanks Chris, it helps quite a bit. Is it the melodic minor
that goes up one way and goes down the other? There's a Mozart #40
audition excerpt that uses one of the minor scales like this to show a
committee how well one does a spicatto, and it sounds really cool.

You're quite welcome.

The "Melodic Minor" I quoted is only the ascending form of the scale. Classically trained musicians practice the scale that way on the way up and play Natural minor on the way down. HASBRO'S article covers that, too.


P.S. - Sorry, accidentally hit "edit" instead of "Reply" the first time I responded. DOH!

There are alot of posts happening in this thread, alot of methodologies being expressed, and many things not being said that should be said. All the things being talked about are practice tools, study aids, things you leave behind on the gig. I just see too many people (Ed, Chris, and a couple of others excluded) getting the impression that the music being discussed is ALL ABOUT SCALES this makes me sad.
I just hope that everybody looking for answers in this thread understand that if you do the work in the practice room it will come out on the gig not as a melodic minor, dorian, or lydian scale but MUSIC, YOUR MUSIC.
I just wanted to say this.
Mike

There are alot of posts happening in this thread, alot of methodologies being expressed, and many things not being said that should be said. All the things being talked about are practice tools, study aids, things you leave behind on the gig. I just see too many people (Ed, Chris, and a couple of others excluded) getting the impression that the music being discussed is ALL ABOUT SCALES this makes me sad.
I just hope that everybody looking for answers in this thread understand that if you do the work in the practice room it will come out on the gig not as a melodic minor, dorian, or lydian scale but MUSIC, YOUR MUSIC.
I just wanted to say this.
Mike

Jeez, I thought I was the one that was saying it wasn't about scales.
Not to make you sad like unto a wee forlorn puppy, but yes, there is work to be done, as you say. And if somebody's questions seem to point to the "how can I improve my game" part, then we gotta talk about the "standing in the corner making left handed jump shots for 2 hours a day" part. And no, roundball in the heat of the moment is not about standing in the corner making left handed jump shots. It's about taking all of the little parts and working til they are no impediment so that all you have to think about in the game is not thinking, just playing.

the reason we present all of these methodologies is because this is the experience that each of us has had that has gotten us to the point that we are currently. ANd that sounds like where twiz wants to get to. Where he's not looking at an Aminor7flat5 and going "What works?" but hearing sounds unfold and entering into that musical conversation with his own things to say.

Don't cry for me, MOOKINTINA.

I just see too many people (Ed, Chris, and a couple of others excluded) getting the impression that the music being discussed is ALL ABOUT SCALES this makes me sad.


Well - I don't think this is necessarily the case - it was just the question that was asked!! So some of us feel we should answer a question - others feel obliged to provide the answer to the question that the person should have asked!! ;)

Not that I'm putting myself in the first category - I find myslf on here doing the latter quite a lot - but it was Ed who first taught me to do this and I have often followed his esteemed example in other discussions on TB!! :D

Bruce, Twiz ended the start-of-the-thread post with: "can anyone please give me some guidance on developing fine jazz soloing for the 1-chord-per-measure standards? thanks!" which tells me that is the important bit, the conclusion, the main question - which is what people have been answering. Mike da Mook pointed out what he thought was important, as has you Ed, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all. And so they should. You might not wander off-topic after all! ;)

But I was responding to the part where he said :

"a lot of bassists will stress that you should forget about scales and focus on playing the chords and chordal substitutes, so in autumn leaves, focus on playing the notes forming the Am7 chord, D7 chord, G7 chord, etc etc."

The clue was in the fact that I quoted it!! ;)

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua:
Jeez, I thought I was the one that was saying it wasn't about scales.

Yeah I pointed that out and don't worry I'm not crying. I have to say I'm really glad to see that your back Ed, your posts always inspire me.