Are chords Jazz or is Jazz played over chords?

[Bruce Lindfield]

OK - the following is from Mark Sabatella's "Jazz Improvisation primer and this is the part that is explaining what I was trying to :

"Blues
The term "blues" is somewhat overloaded, describing a general style of music and a more specific category of chord progressions, as well as its colloquial meaning of a particular mood, as in the phrase "I've got the blues". The blues as a style has a rich history that is beyond the scope of this primer. The basic twelve bar blues form was mentioned earlier. In its original form, still played often in rock and R&B music, only three chords are used: the I chord, the IV chord, and the V chord. The basic blues progression is:
|| I | I | I | I | which, || F | F | F | F |
| IV | IV | I | I | in the key of F, | Bb | Bb | F | F |
| V | IV | I | I || yields: | C | Bb | F | F ||.


The chords are usually all played as dominant seventh chords, although they are not actually functioning as dominant chords in that they do not resolve to a tonic. The F blues scale can be played over this entire progression. While the blues progression can be played in any key, the most popular keys among jazz musicians seem to be F, Bb, and Eb, whereas rock musicians often prefer E, A, D, or G. This has a lot to do with the way instruments are tuned. Popular jazz instruments such as the trumpet and the various members of the saxophone family are usually tuned in Bb or Eb, meaning that the notated ``C'' played on these instruments actually sounds like a Bb or Eb respectively. Music written for these instruments is therefore transposed. The fingerings for the instruments favors playing in the key of C, which is actually Bb or Eb, depending on the instrument. Guitars tend to dominate rock music, and guitars are tuned to favor the keys containing sharps.
Playing the blues scale over the basic three chord blues progression in a jazz setting gets old very quickly. Starting around the swing era, and most notably in the bebop era, musicians began to make additions to this simple formula. One common adaptation of the blues progression, which is still considered the standard for jazz jam sessions, is:

|| F7 | Bb7 | F7 | F7 |
| Bb7 | Bb7 | F7 | D7alt |
| Gm7 | C7 | F7 | C7 |.


This progression offers a wider range of scale possibilities than does the basic three chord blues. For example, bars 8 and 9 form a V-i in G minor, and bars 9-11 form a ii-V-I in F.
The idea of adding ii-V's to the blues progression yields more variations. For example, consider:

|| F7 | Bb7 | F7 | Cm7 F7 |
| Bb7 | Bdim | F7 | Am7b5 D7alt |
| Gm7 | C7alt | F7 D7alt | Gm7 C7alt |.


This particular progression is especially common in bebop and later styles. Note the substitution of a Bb ii-V-I in bars 4-5, a G minor ii-V-i in bars 8-9, and a G minor V-i in bars 11-12. Also note the diminished chord in bar 6. This diminished chord is serving as a substitute for the dominant seventh, since both Bdim and Bb7b9 share the same Bb HW (B WH) diminished scale. This same substitution can be made for the second half of bar 2.
Other variations can be made using tritone substitutions. For example, Ab7 can be played instead of D7alt in the second half of bar 8. You can also change the qualities of the chords, for instance replacing that Ab7 with an Abm7. Another common substitution is A7alt for the F7 in bar 11. This substitution works because the chords share several notes, including the tonic, F, and because the A7alt forms part of a G minor II-V-i progression with the D7alt and Gm7 that follow.

Charlie Parker carried these types of substitutions to an extreme in "Blues For Alice". The chord progression in that tune is:

|| Fmaj7 | Em7b5 A7b9 | Dm7 G7 | Cm7 F7 |
| Bb7 | Bbm7 Eb7 | Am7 D7 | Abm7 Db7 |
| Gm7 | C7 | Fmaj7 D7alt | Gm7 C7 |.


This uses most of the techniques described above. You may wish to play with this progression for a while.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

Originally posted by Phil Smith
Bruce,

Are chords Jazz or is Jazz played over chords? Yes or no?

I agree with Ed, when he said on the first page:

"It's not chords and it's not (strictly) improvisation. It's an approach to harmony AND an approach to improvisation that is unique to jazz."

But of course, an "approach to harmony" includes and involves chords/scales - and you can't define that approach, without reference to these!!

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield


Well - I don't buy albums that consist entirely of drum solos!! I think such a thing would be pretty dull and at a typical Jazz gig that I attend, there are maybe 2 or 3 drums solos out of an evening where the Sax player will probably solo on every tune!

So.. in your world Jazz is albums? In mine it's performance.

Stay typical.

Anyway - to qualify for what? How many Jazz CDs have no harmonic or melodic content - I have lists of thousands, but can't think of any!?

Sounds like an excellent point of reference.

PS - Brad's "stalking" me again - time to hit the ignore button and actually go off to a Jazz gig and listen to some real music!!

Please use the ignore function, your constant whining about a simple difference of opinion is stale. And you're hardly worth stalking... I just think that in this thread your opinion and mine don't jibe.

Enjoy your "real music". Nice box you've got there

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
Bottom line, I hear a lotta 8th note stuff that starts and stops in the same place in a bar, some quarter note triplet stuff that does the same thing. What I don't hear is anybody taking and developing a rhythmic composition the way that Bird or Lee Konitz or Billy or Elvin or Bu or abouta buncha other jazz players do. I don't hear the same openess and flexibility. I don't hear the interactivity and suppleness in the interplay between "soloist" and rhythm section.

And you don't hear that with a lot of so-called Jazz artists today... only the really good ones

BTW can you get any more "open" than Free Jazz?

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield


Well, I think Ed is just reacting to this statement (which I copied above) and disagreeing with that.

So marc seems to be trying to say that "street corner" rap is the equivalent today of Jazz in the 60s, for example.

I think there are big differences in that all the great Jazz musicians have a very high standard of musicianship and understanding of music theory - even if only at a practical level.

Whereas, rappers basically have no need of any of this and don't actually demonstrate it either! OK - maybe a highly developed sense of rhythm if we're being generous, but none of the skills which you need to improvise melodies coherently over chord changes.

I don't see any way in which rap can musically be considered the "equivalent" of Jazz in its heyday and tend to agree with Ed that it was always more of an acquired taste and was never the music "of the kids" - I mean my parents(white British, professional) listened to Jazz in the late 50s early 60s and held Jazz parties for their friends - but I can't imagine black kids in the ghetto listening to Oscar Peterson and Dave Brubeck records, as my parents did!!

"Whereas, rappers basically have no need of any of this and don't actually demonstrate it either! OK - maybe a highly developed sense of rhythm if we're being generous, but none of the skills which you need to improvise melodies coherently over chord changes".


I guess this is the part I don't get. Why is this deemed a requirement? Why do you (collectively speaking) think it's mandatory to be able to improvise melodies over chord changes to qualify? Why is rhythmic content not enough?

I know any number of Jazz drummers I can listen to and, while I don't hear them improvising harmonically over chord changes...

they still sound like Jazz to me.

Thoughts?

On the Rap tip, if all you heard of Jazz was Kenny G and not Brad Mehldau, would you feel qualified to generalize about the "state of the art"?

The same is true of just about any genre... if all you are exposed to is the most populist artists, the guys doing Sprite commercials and voiceovers for Mr. Clean, maybe you aren't qualified to pass judgement on the fringe artists.

Just maybe.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield


I'll do the second part - harmonic content of verbal solos = 0, zero nada, nothing etc.

Beats actually listening every time

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield


Well I think it's going the other way - when I heard "The Message" - Grandmaster Flash in the early 80s I thought Wow - here is a genuinely new development in music - great lyrics and interesting rhythmical styling.

In the last 20 years though, there has been very little like that and I'm sure if there was anything as good, it would have reached the mainstream as "The Message" did!

Are you serious? The mainstream is typically reserved for the lowest common denominator type stuff.

What was Miles' last mainstream hit?

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald


What MR. FUNGUS said. We did that already in DB, and there's no point in doing it again. And as my (hopefully) final contribution to this thread, I just wanted to say that my big problem with "RAP" is that anybody who wants to call themselves a musician but can't be bothered to deal with MELODY is only a partial musician - and one who has thrown out one my favorite elements of music just because SINGING seems not to be as "stylish" as TALKING these days. To me, this is like someone claiming to be an auto mechanic, but who can't be bothered to deal with engines. Do what you want, but I'll be taking my car elsewhere...

This is a personal opinion only, of course, without any scientific evidence whatsoever being offered to back it up....and, as always, Brad Johnson could be wrong.

If this were true of all Rappers, I could see merit in it. Unfortunately it's not. Granted, I haven't heard any Ella-like scatting lately but that doesn't mean there's no melody in any of it. It's just not true.

Then again, I listen to some melodies in Rap and wonder why they made the melodic choices they did... because they didn't know any better or because they actually did have a feel for what they were doing and intentionally creating harmonic tension. I used to wonder the same thing about Ornette Coleman

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
OK that was just a joke - no whining - but how come you say for me that Jazz is CDs - but in the same sentence (that you quoted) I mentioned live gigs as well as CDs?

You must be slipping!

I was referring to this: "Well - I don't buy albums that consist entirely of drum solos!!"

Who's slipping now, BL

BTW I was joking too. Sometimes it's fun to verbally spar. I get the feeling you like it too.

I go to Jazz gigs every week, but I've never been to one with just drums/percussion. I've been to quite a few with no drums though.

My point was that I think you can listen to drums and percussion and still recognize it as Jazz... if that's what they're playing.

The point I was making though, is there are many reference lists of great Jazz albums or recommended Jazz albums and none of these are just drum solos - if you can name one, then I will be very interested to check it out?

My point was, Jazz is not limited to recorded output.

Until next time, Moriarty

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald



My understanding - which is very limited - was that the origins of rap came from folks imitating the way that Jamaican DJ's would spin records, talking rhythmically over the record as it played. There was one in particular...DJ COOL HERC?? (sp??)...that I understood was one of the first to really spread this practice to the states by doing it in New York before anyone else. Of course, my memory is so bad, I could be talking out of my @$$, but does any of this ring a bell?

I don't think there's an official "Rap birthday", it all depends on your scope. James Brown was rapping long before the genre became official. The same is true of the Last Poets, back in the early 70's. IME Rap did not initially require a DJ... some early examples were possibly best described as rhyming versions of the game, the dozens.

Then again, while I was in the video store today, I heard Walter Brennan doing "Old River". Who knew Grandpa was an OG?

My only problem with most of this discussion is the generalizations, as if there is one Jazz, one Rap, one set of rules, one type. It's not that simple yet we try to make it be that way.

 

[Phil Smith]

I've created this new thread based upon comments by Bruce Lindfield and Chris Fitzgerald in another thread. Bruce seems to think that the chords i.e. the progressions are what make music Jazz. Chris seems to think this Link Removed of a cover of Outkast's Ms Jackson is R&B. The excerpt here is an improvisation over the changes to the tune. Countless Jazz tunes have their origins from show tunes i.e. the chord progressions from show tunes have been used as a improvisational framework.

Can the improvisation in this excerpt be considered Jazz? Moreover, if inner city youth had launched the hip hop movement with harmony and instruments as opposed to rhythm and lyrics, what would be calling the resulting music?

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield

Well this is very much taken out of context and is not really what I believe.

Basically, Jazz is a type of music that has developed organically over a whole century and it is impossible to pin down what it is, in a sentence. In my view this is far too simplistic!

No it's not taken out of context, here's what you said in the other thread:

It is all about the chords and theri function in the harmony - this sound was adopted by some 20th Century composers working in the classical area and you can clearly hear the Jazz sound, no matter who plays those works - so like Rhapsody in Blue always sounds Jazzy whether it is the Moscow or London Symphony orchestra!

You seemed to have changed your position somewhat or should I say softened your line.

What I was saying however, was that if you take a plain, unaltered 12 bar Blues sequence and only play the Blues Scale (Pentatonic) over it - it will sound less "Jazzy" than if you add chord substitutions, altered chords etc. and then play different scales over it.

I think most people will hear the difference and hear one as more Jazz(y) than the other.

You're a making a broad generalization here. Take a listen to "California Nights" as performed by Wes Montgomery on the "A Day In The Life" recording, he's wearing the Pentatonic scale out on that cut.

I know lots of UK musicians who play Jazz professionally, but also will do sessions on rock, R&B records, chill-out ambient, pure pop or even hip hop!

So the main difference when they play Jazz is that they are changing their note choices - they know that there are a set of chords/scales that will work in Jazz but not in other styles. Ok there is style and attitude, but the most noticable difference is a set of extended scales and chords that "work" in Jazz but not everywhere else.

I would say the main difference is the style and the attitude since the only thing really required to "Jazz" up a blues is a swing feel by the drums, the bass, and the phrasing of the solo instruments.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield


Hmmm... interesting - not something I know a lot about, but Wynton Marsalis and his family, for example, are hardly from a ghetto or "the street" are they?

I mean Miles Davis was the son of a professional father and wasn't really fighting his way out of poverty?

A great deal of rap artist do come from a middle class background, which is why there is a controversey about gangsta rap and whether or not the artist are/have truly lived the experience in which they are expounding about. The roots of the music, grew out of dance music, the original raps were over instrumental versions of R&B tunes. In any case, I don't think Ed's comments about the two genre's origin are accurate.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield


Well, I think Ed is just reacting to this statement (which I copied above) and disagreeing with that.

So marc seems to be trying to say that "street corner" rap is the equivalent today of Jazz in the 60s, for example.

I think there are big differences in that all the great Jazz musicians have a very high standard of musicianship and understanding of music theory - even if only at a practical level.

Whereas, rappers basically have no need of any of this and don't actually demonstrate it either! OK - maybe a highly developed sense of rhythm if we're being generous, but none of the skills which you need to improvise melodies coherently over chord changes.

I don't see any way in which rap can musically be considered the "equivalent" of Jazz in its heyday and tend to agree with Ed that it was always more of an acquired taste and was never the music "of the kids" - I mean my parents(white British, professional) listened to Jazz in the late 50s early 60s and held Jazz parties for their friends - but I can't imagine black kids in the ghetto listening to Oscar Peterson and Dave Brubeck records, as my parents did!!

Let me put this simply Bruce, you don't know what you're talking about. Check out "Thinking in Jazz, The Infinite Art of Improvisation", chapter one, which will give you some insight as to why you're wrong about your assumptions of what was going on in the black community during the Jazz heyday. Personally, I have direct experience, parents, brothers, sisters, friends, neighbors, etc. that directly contradicts what you're saying, but don't take my word for it, do some reading.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
Well I did say previously, I don't know much about this and I was joking on the last point - too obvious?

But then I'm not trying to prove that Rap is the direct equivalent of Jazz - I was just explaining what Ed was saying. I don't really care about this and it's not really of interest to me in the way that Jazz music is.

I think there's no doubt that there is more practical exposition of music theory in a record by John Coltrane, (choose who you will, from Jazz greats in history) than all of Rap music put together!

Yeah, I know you don't know much about this, which is why you were called on it.

Here's something you might want to try, take a rap tune and transcribe the rhythmic and harmonic content of the verbal solo's.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
OK that was just a joke - no whining - but how come you say for me that Jazz is CDs - but in the same sentence (that you quoted) I mentioned live gigs as well as CDs?

You must be slipping!

I go to Jazz gigs every week, but I've never been to one with just drums/percussion. I've been to quite a few with no drums though.

The point I was making though, is there are many reference lists of great Jazz albums or recommended Jazz albums and none of these are just drum solos - if you can name one, then I will be very interested to check it out?

Bruce, your missing the point. You proclaim things about rap, but how much have you heard? I get the notion not much, are you familiar with Queen Latifah? Every check out some of the cuts on the "Nature of a Sista" CD? I would post a clip here, but you can't access sound files.

The point is not that this is Jazz, but the verbal solo's are on par with Jazz solo's, though they may or may not (I haven't heard everything) be on the level of a Charlie Parker or other Jazz artist the represent the tip of the triangle of the art.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
Well, there are two areas of confusion here. So firstly my definition of "Rap" is unpitched verbalisation - as other have said "speaking" rather than singing. So OK, I have been having fun playing with this concept in the argument, as Brad says - sparring - but seriously, if I heard somebody singing , well I would say then that's not Rap - that's (insert some other appropriate genre).

There's no such thing as "unpitched verbalisation" in rap, though you may be able to find that quality in a computer generated voice. Your sounding like the music neophyte that listens to Jazz and proclaims it's all jibberish.

Secondly, how is something in music "on a par" with something else - can you compare Jazz with say and Orchestral concert by an 150-piece symphony orchestra playing a complex work that took the composer 7 years to write and orchestrate?

Sure you can, it depends on the piece. Take "Porgy and Bess" for example.

So based on the first point I can only see any possibility of a rap solo as being on a par with a drum solo in Jazz - hence my point that do people go to Jazz gigs or buy Jazz CDs just for the drum solos - I don't think so.

This is a weak argument. If the leader is the drummer, then people are going to the gigs for the drum solo's and are buying Jazz CD's for that as well.

But mostly I Just think you cannot compare chalk and cheese - Friday night I saw a Jazz quartet : alto,piano,bass and drums. Last night I saw a large symphony orchestra playing South American Contemporary Classcial with a Bandoneon soloist in a concerto and a Mezzo-soprano singing seven Spanish songs - I have no idea whether any it was on a par with anything else - I just really liked it!!

When I say on par, I'm talking about the improvisational aspects. A person's ability to make up rhymes (with harmony) and articulate them rhythmically on the spot is on par with a solo instrumentalists ability to make up harmony and articulate that rhythmically on the spot.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
Well to me if it's pitched, then it's singing and not rapping- that's all I'm saying! /QUOTE]

Well according to your definition, rap is singing, because it most definitely is pitched. All speech is pitched, unless of course your ear is unpitched.

I just don't think you can compare and don't see the need to anyway - are we talking about a competitive sports hierarchy - rapper 10 points , Jazz soloist 10 points - it just makes no sense to me?

Is the Double Bassist in a symphony orchestra under "par" when he play a piece that only has a very few notes written which are very simple to play and then suddenly over "par" when he plays in a local Jazz band for fun on Friday night and plays complex solos on every tune?

Par is for Golf, not music!!

It's you that's doing the scoring, go back and read your own posts. You have your own valuation system of what music is what and why. I'm disagreeing with it, because you reasoning seems to be bogus and all over the place.

Here's what you said in another thread, which is the point of this thread:

Well it is often a "Jazzy" sound - so like normal 12 bar blues can have altered chords and the more you alter the more it sounds like Jazz and less like Blues!

If the changes aren't played in the style of Jazz, it won't sound like Jazz. i.e. Jazz is played over chords, but specific sets or types of chords are not Jazz.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Ed Fuqua
Done by who, where? Again my limited understanding puts the beginning in poorer innner city neighborhoods in the Bronx, areas of Philly and Chicago. Not really bastions of the middle class.

The first raps over instrumentals of R&B hits were done by DJ's, commercial ones, as well as those that were spinning at clubs. This is also where the remixes of tunes occurred as the dual turn table setup became popular. What you're referring to Ed, is the origins of Hip Hop, break dancing, resurgance of graffiti, no shoe laces in sneakers, etc, etc.

But again, that's the question that was raised. "Rap is like jazz was in its heyday". So, again, what do you think jazz was in its heyday and why do you think rap fills the same function now? Specifically, do you think that the reasons why Bird did what he did and Queen Latifah does what she does are the same? What do you think those reasons are?

An apple isn't going to be an orange, though both may be fruit, in which case the creative energy of that envelope is the same.

OK, Phil. Why don't we both take a look at some transcriptions? Get two examples of a rap artist (or artists) on tape (or MD or CD if that's easier) and send'em to me (or maybe we can hook up for a beer or something) and I'll pull a couple (prolly Tony offa Four and More and Billy off of one of the Blue Note thangs rather than Ornette. That way we can both post salient examples with our reasoning here and everbody can make up their own minds.
Fair enough?

There's already been sufficient post analysis of what cats played on jazz tunes and the theory of why they played what they played. What has yet to be explored is what the tonal and rhythmic breakdown is of a rapper's lines. I'd be willing to do that, when I get some space on my plate and post my results at a later date.

 

[Phil Smith]

Originally posted by Chris Fitzgerald
My understanding - which is very limited - was that the origins of rap came from folks imitating the way that Jamaican DJ's would spin records, talking rhythmically over the record as it played. There was one in particular...DJ COOL HERC?? (sp??)...that I understood was one of the first to really spread this practice to the states by doing it in New York before anyone else. Of course, my memory is so bad, I could be talking out of my @$$, but does any of this ring a bell?

I don't know about that, though Caribbean artist have been doing covers of US tunes for a long time, so there could be some truth to it.

Radio DJ personalities prided themselves on their vocal delivery and social and philosophical commentary and that area became competitive in a way, i.e. the envelope kept getting pushed. Frankie Crocker, Gary Byrd, (all NYC radio market) along with others are examples of this.