im trying to expand my horizons in music and want to focus on more of jazz and theory of it. so i was wandering if anyone knew of any good studying material or books that can help me learn more about it.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
jazz\ theory book.
- Thread starter sorefingers
- Start date
There's a book called The Jazz Theory Book by Mark Levine. It's wonderful - I think Sher Music is the publisher.
+1 for Mark Levine's book. I've just read it recently, actually, it's a good first step and easy to read.
- May 28, 2007
- 277
- 0
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Aguilar Amplification, Optima Strings
I've been studying from it. Better now? *sigh* The point is this book helped me understand how jazz "works".
The Jazz Theory Book by Mark Levine is pretty good. Just remember that most of the notation examples are in treble clef.
I think I've read it all now - but the real value is to go through and play the examples on piano if you can and/or listen to the examples suggested on recordings.
I also dip into it often - when a particular tune I'm working on has some "theoretical implications" that I vaguely remember but am not sure about...
As an educator I probably wouldn't use the Jazz Theory book when teaching. There are a lot of theoretical concepts in the book that I disagree with, such as his very short-sighted and impractical treatment of chord/scale equivalence. However, as a self-educating tool for those who aren't jazz-inclined, it is indeed pretty comprehensive, and will get you up to a functioning level pretty decently. Most basic questions about melody, harmony and rhythm can be answered, and it can help with expanding the information that you already know.
Can't speak to the Levine book.
But when I was in college I milked a lot of jazz theory from Marc Sabatella's online primer:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
As for the problem of chord/scale equivalency (something that Abersold books also get criticized for) , some consider it be a pitfall to simply think "chord X means I play scales Y or Z" without really trying to understand what the chords mean functionally , how they relate to the key of the song, and especially how to relate what you are playing to the melody.
But when I was in college I milked a lot of jazz theory from Marc Sabatella's online primer:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
As for the problem of chord/scale equivalency (something that Abersold books also get criticized for) , some consider it be a pitfall to simply think "chord X means I play scales Y or Z" without really trying to understand what the chords mean functionally , how they relate to the key of the song, and especially how to relate what you are playing to the melody.
I disagree - I see his approach as :
- Listen to this sound
- Get it into your head
- Here are some theoretical ideas for things you could play that fit with that sound
- Here's what Jazz greats of the past have done with this
I don't see it as prescriptive at all - you can take what you want from it - it's all there for you to use as you will!
I disagree - I see his approach as :
- Listen to this sound
- Get it into your head
- Here are some theoretical ideas for things you could play that fit with that sound
- Here's what Jazz greats of the past have done with this
I don't see it as prescriptive at all - you can take what you want from it - it's all there for you to use as you will!
I don't mind Jamey Aebersold's approach to chord/scales so much as a method of performance and teaching, and I certainly don't mind the chord/scale theory as a concept. That's not what I was getting at with my criticism of Levine's book, far from it. It's more a criticism of how he presents the material as a sound theoretical concept. It's very leaky.
I'm very much a part of the Berklee chord/scale academic mindset, which is good because I spend 15 hours a week tutoring harmony here, and the last two semesters of core harmony classes deal primarily with labeling and dissecting chord scales. The Berklee system is extremely detailed in classifying degrees of the scale and has a very specific way of going about assigning scales and generating scales based upon roman numeral analysis of passages. Seven note "scales" are derived from the four chord tones and the three diatonic tensions (if they diatonically occur a major 9th above a chord tone) or scale degrees/notes in the key (if they are a minor 9th above a chord tone).
This stands at odd's with Mark's treatment, which doesn't take analysis of a chord progression into account, and forgoes these traditional diatonic models of chord progression for a modal analysis of them. He simply says "Lydian equals major seven" or "Phrygian equals 7sus4b9", which is a gross oversimplication, and, like stated before, ignores the potential diatonic function of the chord. Chord scales are simply horizontal extrapolations of a chord, and so the place of the chord within a key matters a great deal. There is a definite hierarchy of pitches too in terms of harmonic significance and importance to the integrity of the harmonic moment, which is lacking in a pure modal analysis that doesn't analyze specific pitches as having importance or tendencies. Just saying "Ionian equals major 7" doesn't distinguish the primary importance of the C, E, G, B as chord tones, the secondary importance of the D and A as tensions, and the harmonic instability and melodic tendencies of the F as an "avoid" note.
Now this is all rather esoteric, so as a methodology, relating modes to chords and then letting the ear take over to figure out what works and what doesn't is perfectly acceptable. That's why I like Jamey Aebersold's deal, because he constantly stresses the importance of the ear in his books, and so he doesn't need to go into a heavy analysis of the chord scales to understand what is going on, because the trained and receptive ear should eventually figure it out intuitively. But when you're touting yourself as a "theory" book, there should be some underlying theoretical discussion. Really, I think of it more as a method book, and it should be treated as such, because you can't your understanding of chord/scales any further with it.
If you guys are interested in what the deal with chord scales are in general, the book to get is found here: http://www.amazon.com/Chord-Scale-Theory-Jazz-Harmony/dp/B000M7B65O/ref=pd_rhf_p_t_1 It's an overview of four semesters of harmony at Berklee, and is more-or-less comprehensive. For a more in-depth study, you'd need to come to Boston to pick up the actual harmony textbooks, which are really just sheets of paper. Another book to get is found here: http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Jazz-V...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223502238&sr=1-1 This isn't as comprehensive, but it gives you a lot to work with in terms of arranging, which is really where Chord/Scales have the most practical relevance. In terms of improvisation, they're just another tool, having at the very least a tacit understanding of them is required for arranging.
As an Amazon Associate, TalkBass may receive commissions from qualifying purchases made via links on this site.
This book is pretty good. (The Jazz Bass Book by John Goldsby)
http://www.amazon.com/Jazz-Bass-Boo...bs_sr_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223503010&sr=8-3
http://www.amazon.com/Jazz-Bass-Boo...bs_sr_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223503010&sr=8-3
As an Amazon Associate, TalkBass may receive commissions from qualifying purchases made via links on this site.
thats exactly what im looking for to improve my licks and stuff. like i wanna learn chord prgressions and stuff and what chords sound good used together and stuff like that.
I have Levine's book too and have gone through it on bass. As Bruce said, I really should take the time to go through it on piano as well. Great reference tool with some good ideas, but you may want some fundamental classical theory under your belt before reading this book. Maybe not.
But I agree with Havic's statement posted above. Aebersold really stresses getting intervals, chords and chromatics into your ear and onto your fretboard. Plus completely lays out chord/scales by name, and by "steps". And it's presented in an easy folksy style with great little motivational sayings/insights and commentary by some of the great jazz players.
Check out his [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]. Useful information, some good commentary on different aspects of jazz and how it "works"(plays) and some good exercises.
Again, that's why I like Jamey Aebersold, because he approaches the whole pedagogical aspect as a matter of performance method, which in jazz requires extensive use of the ear. The ear will be able to pick up on tendency patterns of the sounds of the scales that he suggests. That's the job of the performer and the artist. However, if you claim to write a "theory" book, like Mark Levine did, you should be able to explain WHY the ear acts the way it does, and give some insight into these inner workings of the music and the tendencies of the ear to play things that for whatever reason "sound good/cool" or even sound "bad". He failed in that regard in giving us insight into the broader, encompassing nature of the chord/scale phenomenon. Which is all right if it's a method book (Jamey Aebersold), but it is a "Theory" book.
