Chords and their corresponding modes

[Chris K]

I studied both Classical and Jazz harmony!

Welcome!

 

[Chris K]

I'm surprised you music geniuses didn't point out that a whole sub-genre of jazz is based on modes. It emerged in the late 50's as a style, not just a method of analysis as a way of contemplating solos. It created unique of songs, albums, and adherents. Hmm, that sort of perspective wouldn't come across in a discussion whose sole participants didn't believe modes were useful.

Hey Rob, nobody is a genius here (certainly not me), but I do like to tease a little...

Sub-genre: well put. And exactly in line with what I always say: modal music is interesting, as long as it is modal: entire pieces based on a mode.

Modes get suspicious if incorporated in music based on classical harmony (75% of it all?). Cheap tricks to run across centain chords, dismissing general context and character of the music.

You know, the modal jazz itself is not the problem. The problem is with the frustrated jazz players that didn't make it and became teachers at jazz academies and book writers to keep the money coming and believe that modal jazz is the basis of it all.

So be glad you have a decent job (I also have a decent job; I teach history).

Modal jazz was just an phase in music history to prepare our ears for free jazz. No chords, no scales, what a relief!

 

[Pacman]

So to The Others: get out of this thread, study classical harmony, then come back and we'll discuss the matter again.

You don't get to say this.

 

[dpbass66]

Hey Rob, nobody is a genius here (certainly not me), but I do like to tease a little...

Sub-genre: well put. And exactly in line with what I always say: modal music is interesting, as long as it is modal: entire pieces based on a mode.

Modes get suspicious if incorporated in music based on classical harmony (75% of it all?). Cheap tricks to run across centain chords, dismissing general context and character of the music.

You know, the modal jazz itself is not the problem. The problem is with the frustrated jazz players that didn't make it and became teachers at jazz academies and book writers to keep the money coming and believe that modal jazz is the basis of it all.

So be glad you have a decent job (I also have a decent job; I teach history).

Modal jazz was just an phase in music history to prepare our ears for free jazz. No chords, no scales, what a relief!

The following players are/were either teachers at "jazz academies" or wrote jazz instructional material who , apparently werent good enough to make it, and so resorted to teaching:

Pat Metheny
John Patitucci
Jerry Bergonzi
Jeff Berlin
Ramon Ricker
Lynn Seaton
Dick Grove
Jeff Andrews
Esperanza Spalding
Bob Mintzer

...and the list goes on...

go look at all the great players who teach at the Collective in NYC

go look at all the great players who teach at MIT in LA

go look at all the great players who teach at Berklee in Boston

...shall I continue...

what a gravely inane statement to make.

The truth of the matter is that in most music (especially jazz) excellence does not necessarily confer financial success on a person. Tragically, our society doesnt appreciate certain art forms. Only a few of the GREAT jazz musicians in history ever achieved any significant wealth, and most had/have to resort to taking ******** gigs, or to teaching or to publishing, just to remain solvent. Just come to NYC for a week and attend as many jazz jams as possible, it will nauseate you to see how many Patituccis, Wootens, Breckers, Sterns, Weckls...etc. exist out there....

Here in NY it is not unusual to show up for a top 40 corporate gig and bump into Dave Valentine (flautist extraordinaire), just off the road and earning some extra cash (happened to me..). To get back to my original point , thay all teach and write books as a means to an end.

..and to my 2nd point, "modal music" is "modal music" and bears very little relation to the concept I and others have been arguing regarding the application of modes as scales that match chords. IN fact, lets stop using the word modes, just say scales, because really in jazz pedagogy, the word modes is falling out of favor as it just does not imply what we mean. We are not referring to the modes as in their original context....as used in modal music....and I know you understand this. Stop talking about modal music, either classical or jazz, this is not what I (we) are talking about, it doesnt have any place in this conversation. OK...no modal music any more..... Thanks. The minor chord that functions as a ii chord in a major key perfectly fits a minor scale with a natural sixth degree and a minor seventh degree. Period. No using the word "mode". Historically speaking, thats what a "dorian" mode is, but I dont care if you call it the carburetor mode, or the neoprene mode or the hydrogen mode.

"Scales" are a useful tool to help developing players get sounds into their ears and into their hands. They are also useful to aid in any discussion of chord changes, since a minor chord could be any one of a number of scales (or, better yet, "sounds"). Since the advent of formalized jazz education it has been the method by which students of the craft have learned.

 

[Chris K]

You don't get to say this.

I meant to joke, but since it is my responsability to make that clear - as I obviously did not - I apologize.

As far as I'm concerned, everybody is most welcome to enter any discussion and I'll do my best to discuss all matters respectfully.

 

[Chris K]

The truth of the matter is that in most music (especially jazz) excellence does not necessarily confer financial success on a person. Tragically, our society doesnt appreciate certain art forms. Only a few of the GREAT jazz musicians in history ever achieved any significant wealth, and most had/have to resort to taking ******** gigs, or to teaching or to publishing, just to remain solvent. Just come to NYC for a week and attend as many jazz jams as possible, it will nauseate you to see how many Patituccis, Wootens, Breckers, Sterns, Weckls...etc. exist out there.....

I admit you have a very good point here. Unfortunately I only had the opportunity to witness concerts of Pat Metheny, John Patitucci and Bob Mintzer. All three of them were awesome. Some of the others I have heard of, but, like you said, there's a whole crowd of awesome players who did not reach the top.

So let me be more precise. Many of those musicians are awesome as well and they have my deep respect as musicians. As teachers.... I have serious doubts. It sure is a pity they have to teach 'for the bucks' as opposed to 'out of passion' . I just met too many teachers who were talented players (with awesome ear but only superficial understanding of theory and harmony). They taught me much useful stuff about technique, interpretation, improvisation... However, as soon as they started teaching harmony, they had a strong tendency to mistify the stuff instead of clearing things up.

Exactly that is happening on TB a lot also.

"..and to my 2nd point, "modal music" is "modal music" and bears very little relation to the concept I and others have been arguing regarding the application of modes as scales that match chords. IN fact, lets stop using the word modes, just say scales, because really in jazz pedagogy, the word modes is falling out of favor as it just does not imply what we mean.

I remember myself writing exactly that on TB a year or so ago. I'm glad the word 'modes' is falling out of favor, but I doubt if somebody will be able to replace it.

Scales" are a useful tool to help developing players get sounds into their ears and into their hands. They are also useful to aid in any discussion of chord changes, since a minor chord could be any one of a number of scales (or, better yet, "sounds"). Since the advent of formalized jazz education it has been the method by which students of the craft have learned.

Nobody will ever deny it is, I already wrote the same up this thread. YES, WE DO NEED SCALES. YES, THEY ARE USEFUL.

But we also need to know how scales are related to one another within a certain harmonic context.

And long before formalized jazz education, there was classical music education. Skip it, and your jazz is built on quicksand.