lafaro on nardis

shwashwa · #1 11-09-2005, 03:44 PM

i'm just looking over lafaro's solo on nardis, and i notice that some of his note choices dont line up with the chord of the moment. i.e. he's hanging on the 4th of a dominant chord and on a major chord. then i listen more closely and i notice that bill evans is actually comping in 3 behind the solo for the first 3-4 bars. then it sounds to me like he's starting on beat 1 of the 5th bar and comping in 3 again but landing on 1 on the e major in the 7th bar. is this true? does someone know if this is how they played the tune? he bill does this for the a sections on the first chorus but dropps out on the rest of the chorus' a sections, so its hard to tell what's going on harmonically. also, i'm not sure i'm corect with my analysis. anyone know?

also, what are the chords on the last 2 bars of the a section? i've see E maj to e min, but i have a feeling that's not what's being played....

shwashwa · #2 11-10-2005, 06:42 PM

anyone?

33degrees · #3 11-11-2005, 04:55 AM

i have the hal leonard bill evans trio book:
bars 3-4 hes playing with a 3 feel like, quarter and 8th note triplets but its still written in 4/4, so it probably sounds like its in 3/4.
he probably does this until bar 7 to give this illusion, i havent got the recording im just looking at this book.
yea it is Emajor/E minor at the end but on the E hes doing a bluesy thing thing and playing from the major third to the minor third and on the E minor hes playing like a suss chord.

Bruce Lindfield · #4 11-11-2005, 05:08 AM

Isn't this the whole point about small group Jazz - we're talking about improvised music, where the participants are listening to each other and "stretching out" - playing with the time feel, going across the bar line etc. That's what adds interest to the music...

shwashwa · #5 11-11-2005, 06:41 AM

of course that's the point. i'm just trying to figure out what happened so i can get an accurate anaylsis of lafaro's solo. i notice they do the 3 thing on another recording of that tune, and bill hints at it during his solo. perhaps it was arranged that way. later in his career he did alot of switching between 3 and 4 in the same tune...

33degrees: during the time that bill is playing in 3 on scotts solo, does it look like he's actually only holding the chord for 3 beats? or is he just implying 3 rhythmically and playing in 4 harmonically still? do you follow what i mean? from the recording it sounds like he's actually in 3. the part that's confusing me is how he lands on beat one on bar 7. he makes some sort of rhythmic compensation in bar 4 too so that he lands on beat one in bar 5 if i'm not mistaken.. i can't quite figure it out. do you think it would be possible for you to scan that page for educational purposes? i know i should probably just buy the book, but i already have years worth of transcriptions to work on! any more would be overwhealming!

33degrees · #6 11-11-2005, 07:42 AM

yea hes just hoding some of the notes on for a half beat, syncopated. i cant scan cos i aint got a scanner but maybe i thin you are doing fine, just when you write it out think in Sycopated quarter notes in 4 rather than 3. But obviously i think Evans was just going for a 3 against 4.

Edited by CF AGAIN to remove insulting language.

Marcus Johnson · #7 11-11-2005, 05:34 PM

Oy. Good thing SHWASHWANEGGAR has a kind heart. I personally would stay on his good side, considering he could rip my innards out through my nostril witnout breaking a sweat.

33degrees · #8 11-11-2005, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Lindfield

Isn't this the whole point about small group Jazz - we're talking about improvised music, where the participants are listening to each other and "stretching out" - playing with the time feel, going across the bar line etc. That's what adds interest to the music...

all im saying is this guy is not very polite, you can see in the other guys reply that he's a bit off put by Brucy Boy's aggressively written reply.in fact i dont know why Brucy Boy even bothered to write a reply as his opinion has nothing to do with the original guys question.i might be so bold to add..........

It's pretty clear who's being impolite here, and it isn't Bruce. This is strike two. Randy Johnson's on the mound. Watch the next few balls VERY carefully.

shwashwa · #9 11-12-2005, 10:19 AM

i believe that the insulting language that was edited out of the post was not directed at me, as i was able to read it before the edit was made. i didnt take offense at bruce's response anyway... i do think its funny that marcus johnson remembers that post of mine from long ago...maybe marcus johnson can answer my origional quesion... after all, he did play with bill evans..

Marcus Johnson · #10 11-12-2005, 11:15 AM

I wish! Actually, that was WARMBUTTOCKS that had the pleasure of playing with Bill's trio. (Different Marc Johnson, he played his a$$ off in that band....check out the "Paris Concert discs

) I have spent many hours listening to those trio albums, wondering how they flew through those time feel changes so seamlessly, almost telepathically. I think I mentioned here before, John Abercrombie's comment to Marc Johnson after a set with the Evans trio; "Man that was great...I didn't know where one was the whole time!"

33degrees · #11 11-12-2005, 11:19 AM

was that with peter erskin?

Marcus Johnson · #12 11-12-2005, 11:23 AM

On the last trio? Nope, that was Joe LaBarbera.

Bruce Lindfield · #13 11-14-2005, 04:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33degrees

by Brucy Boy's aggressively written reply.in fact i dont know why Brucy Boy even bothered to write a reply as his opinion has nothing to do with the original guys question.i might be so bold to add..........

Well - I think I know who was being aggressive in their posts and who wasn't...

I was just offering a description and seeing if that was what the original poster meant?

He came back and confimed that was what he meant -

Quote:

Originally Posted by shwashwa

of course that's the point.

...so the thread could continue with no misunderstanding - I don't see how that has "nothing to do with the original question" - in fact , I see it that the original poster confirmed that it was everything to do with what the question was about !!