Rhythm Changes?

[geoffkhan]

All you seem to be doing is regurgitating stuff that you found "really neat" with a seeming disregard for whatever is going on musically.

I find this assumption offending. How would you feel if someone told you that?

If you're accusing me of playing "riffs", what is wrong with playing "riffs?" I try to stay away from playing riffs, but to be honest even the best players have riffs. I asked Mimi Fox about that and she said that definitely everyone has their riffs that they play.

So I would say, yes, on the occasion I will play a pre-planned riff. But I pay careful attention to make sure it fits musically into what everyone else is playing, and in the context of the song.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

There we go.

It wasn't age discriminating as much as it was experience discerning. As it was pointed out earlier, you seem to be making a herculean effort to support an uninformed point, to wit - playing over one set of changes is somehow more interesting and imaginative than playing over another set. When the general response was that it's the player, not the changes, you launch into a massive attempt to justify your remarks by offering "more interesting" changes, not "more interesting" playing.

Just by the by, when you are playing with these folks that have been playing since before 1956, you give them the same kind of **** you been giving PAC? When you jump into these changes on the bridge of RHYTHM, are they playing anything that remotely hints that that's the direction they want to go? And if they DO start resolving downward chromatically, do you rag them for being boring and unimaginative? I do find your remark that "musicians listened to each without regard to level" to be misinformed as well. There's a well documented lineage of less experienced musicians learning from more experienced ones. Again, it's not AGE, it's EXPERIENCE. Just because I learned a lot playing with Chris Potter doesn't mean that EVERY 15 year old tenor player will have the same range of experience. The ones that DO tend not to say stupid ****.

But again, alla this is neither here nor there. I did miss your evaluation of PAC's playing. What I'd like to know is, how do you reconcile that assesment with the "boring and unimaginative" part. If PAC plays interesting ****, it's interesting. No matter WHAT the changes are.

Lynn's remarks still hold.

 

[Lovebown]

Hah...things havent changed around here I see....

/lovebown

 

[Aaron]

Ok, you're totally brow-beating me now. That age-discriminating remark was totally uncalled for. Ed, you should be ashamed of yourself!

I don't think he should be ashamed for anything he's said. Your tone and word choice has come off as being fairly insulting to them. I don't think Ed should be the one that should be ashamed for what he's said.

He wasn't discriminating based on age, but experience. Which I see nothing wrong with. No one complains about not getting a job over someone with more experience, education, and training.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

You know, since you're such a big NYC hotshot player, how about if you post a sample of your wonderfully magnanimous playing so we can hear how cool cats like you get it done.

WEE WILLIE - just follow the same link for Pac's samples and you'll find mine. Just click on my name instead of his.

TBDB SAMPLER - I'm surprised that there are still folks unaware of this, it has it's own area in the DOUBLE BASS FORUMS. Damon Rondeau has graciously provided server space to host sound files for a number of DB players here at TalkBass. There's a lot of music there, mostly but not all jazz, by some really wonderful players - Ray Parker, Mike McGuirk, Paul Warburton, Sam, Chris, well pretty much everybody.

There have been a number of recent entries, so Damon must still have some room if ANYBODY has eyes to post something. Or even just provide a link to files on your (or the band) website.

 

[Aaron]

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Edit: Man, I need to get quicker at this replying thing.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

Oh, and there's a section in the thread where you can praise, diss, comment, question, etc.

If you feel like it...

 

[godoze]

God, I love this place !

 

[geoffkhan]

I don't think he should be ashamed for anything he's said. Your tone and word choice has come off as being fairly insulting to them. I don't think Ed should be the one that should be ashamed for what he's said.

He wasn't discriminating based on age, but experience. Which I see nothing wrong with. No one complains about not getting a job over someone with more experience, education, and training.

I made careful attention to try not to sound arrogant, but if I have come off as an *******, I'm very sorry, I certainly didn't intend to.

I was just trying to pass on some musical ideas.

Please give me a logical explanation why my ideas do not work, or are "wrong", rather than just telling me how I am so much more inexperienced than your are, and how you were playing in NYC since I was crapping in your diapers.

 

[Jason Carota]

Please give me a logical explanation why my ideas do not work, or are "wrong"

Ok, I'll bite. Let's see if I have understood all previous posts (I've gone through this thread a couple times now.)

Your argument:

I reharmonized a section of Rhythm Changes to what I consider to be more interesting, but it is still RC.

Ed Fuqa's, Pacman's, etc. argument:

Your reharms may sound good to you (as well as others...I listened to the mp3s and enjoyed them) and fit logically using theory. However, by virtue of you reharms, you have departed from the accepted structure of the piece which identifies it as Rhythm Changes to the vast majority of jazz musicians.

My (who still has about 1,000 years of learning to go) argument:

Let us compare the structure of the discussed section of Rhythm Changes to something other than music. We'll try marketing icons.

Everyone knows the "Golden Arches" and what they represent - McDonalds fast-food restaurants. Over the years, minor alterations have been made, but the basic underlying structure still leads 99% of consumers to recognize them (the arches) as a symbol of McDonalds.

Now, if someone were hired by McD's to "spice up" the McDonalds symbol, and they changed it from the Golden Arches to a hamburger and fries with the Hamburgler behind them, you may get some fry oil thrown at you ( a la Pacman's violent horn player ). The person who created the symbol may like it alot, but placed in context of everyday life, most people will not recognize it immediately. They will walk down the street looking for McD's, not see the Arches, and just keep walking until they find what they are looking for. Much like when a horn player may be looking for an accepted form of Rhythm Changes when a reharmed section that strays too far is played. They, as will the rest of the band, will continue to play what they know has been accepted over the years.

That is why I believe your presented reharm is incorrect within Rhythm Changes. It may sound good, but it strays too far from what works functionally.

All right. Hope that makes sense. If not, then I believe I just destroyed the best (IMO) thread of 2004 and beyond.

 

[Jace The Bass]

Yep - I agree. Try this excercise: play your bridge to Changes on the next gig you do. Don't tell anyone about it, let them pick it up by ear.





Then see if you hear the phone ring!

Geoffkhan alot of wisdom there it's O'kay in a practice pointview reharm. changes but in a bandstand pointview you have to realise that their are other musicans
Playing music with others is about the music not how one person conveys their ideas and plays his/her way of regardless of others like mentioned before use your ears but also listen to your fellow musicians to see if it helps the tune in relation to your fellow musicians
That's the key while you could know all or most of the tricks used ( hell I don't even use the coltrane changes on the bandstand unless I hear others going in that direction ) it is useful to give and take
But you'll find out with experience of what to play and not to play like Pacman said I too have been playing for years proffessionally but not as much as ED but have learned what to do and what not to do
But don't get me wrong I'm not saying what you're doing is wrong but just keep in mind when your on the bandstand Man even I would love to play all my reharm. but depending on the musicians that you are with it pays to be cautious you can try it but if others arent hearing it then play within the context but if their experience pro's then by all means but also you must keep the tune within prespective otherwise people won't reconignize the tune

 

[geoffkhan]

As it was pointed out earlier, you seem to be making a herculean effort to support an uninformed point, to wit - playing over one set of changes is somehow more interesting and imaginative than playing over another set. When the general response was that it's the player, not the changes, you launch into a massive attempt to justify your remarks by offering "more interesting" changes, not "more interesting" playing.

Lol. Why do you do reharmonizations at all? Personally I like more complicated, challenging chord progressions to play over. In my opinion I find more unusual chord progressions more interesting and imaginative. There you go, there's your answer!

Geoffkhan alot of wisdom there it's O'kay in a practice pointview reharm. changes but in a bandstand pointview you have to realise that their are other musicans
Playing music with others is about the music not how one person conveys their ideas and plays his/her way of regardless of others like mentioned before use your ears but also listen to your fellow musicians to see if it helps the tune in relation to your fellow musicians
That's the key while you could know all or most of the tricks used ( hell I don't even use the coltrane changes on the bandstand unless I hear others going in that direction ) it is useful to give and take
But you'll find out with experience of what to play and not to play like Pacman said I too have been playing for years proffessionally but not as much as ED but have learned what to do and what not to do
But don't get me wrong I'm not saying what you're doing is wrong but just keep in mind when your on the bandstand Man even I would love to play all my reharm. but depending on the musicians that you are with it pays to be cautious you can try it but if others arent hearing it then play within the context but if their experience pro's then by all means but also you must keep the tune within prespective otherwise people won't reconignize the tune

I learned that a long time ago. If I were to play my reharm, I'd make sure that it was arranged, and change the A and B section to fit. Yes, it wouldn't be Rhythm Changes anymore -- it'd be "Rhythm Changes - Reharmonized."

Now, if someone were hired by McD's to "spice up" the McDonalds symbol, and they changed it from the Golden Arches to a hamburger and fries with the Hamburgler behind them, you may get some fry oil thrown at you ( a la Pacman's violent horn player ). The person who created the symbol may like it alot, but placed in context of everyday life, most people will not recognize it immediately. They will walk down the street looking for McD's, not see the Arches, and just keep walking until they find what they are looking for. Much like when a horn player may be looking for an accepted form of Rhythm Changes when a reharmed section that strays too far is played. They, as will the rest of the band, will continue to play what they know has been accepted over the years.

That is why I believe your presented reharm is incorrect within Rhythm Changes. It may sound good, but it strays too far from what works functionally.

Here is a progression of reharms. I'd probably use one of these at a gig. In fact, next time I play Rhythm Changes, I will make a point of using one of these reharmonizations:

Original B section:

D7 | % | G7 | % | C7 | % | F7 | %

Level 1:

Am7 | D7 | Dm7 | G7 | Gm7 | C7 | Cm7 | F7

Level 2:

Am7 | D7 | Dm7 | Db9 | EbM7 | C7 | Cm7 | F7

Level 3:

Am7 | D7 | Dm7 | Db9 | C9 | G7(#5) | Cm7 | F7

Level 4:

Am7 Eb13 | D9 | % | Db9 | C9 | G7(#5) | Cm7 | B13

 

[Mike Dimin]

What we are really talking about is recomposition as opposed to reharmonization. Reharmonization is a facet of improvisation. It add flavor and spice to an existing form. Recomposition, on the other hand, is just as valid, it is just something that everyone needs to be aware of BEFORE the hit

Dimin

 

[Jason Carota]

In fact, next time I play Rhythm Changes, I will make a point of using one of these reharmonizations:

Ok, but make sure you are the leader on the bandstand. Let them know of the changes. If you jump into something such as your different levels of reharmonization, without anyone else's prior knowledge, watch out.


EDIT - Such as what Mike Dimin says about being aware of above.

 

[geoffkhan]

What we are really talking about is recomposition as opposed to reharmonization. Reharmonization is a facet of improvisation. It add flavor and spice to an existing form. Recomposition, on the other hand, is just as valid, it is just something that everyone needs to be aware of BEFORE the hit

Dimin

Okay, thank you for clearing that misunderstanding. So in all of my previous posts, replace "reharmonization" with "recomposition." Well, all except that last one. Those are more like reharmonizations, right?

Ok, but make sure you are the leader on the bandstand. Let them know of the changes. If you jump into something different such as your different levels of reharmonization, without anyone else's prior knowledge, then, watch out.

Joe Gilman told me that if I did some reharmonization in the middle of a song, it would be fine, as long as I repeat that same reharmonization the next time around.

I think the real deal is finding a reharmonization that will work with what other people are playing. My piano teacher was telling me that in his quartet, when they play a song like the 12-bar blues or Rhythm Changes, anyone can just start a reharmonization, and everyone just immediately catches on. Of course, the bassist in his band is Chuck Metcalf...

 

[Pacman]

Lol. Why do you do reharmonizations at all? Personally I like more complicated, challenging chord progressions to play over. In my opinion I find more unusual chord progressions more interesting and imaginative. There you go, there's your answer!

This goes right back to Lynn's comment. Because you can't (or, to give the benefit of the doubt, won't) come up with interesting stuff to play on the original changes, you've got to do something to add interest. I submit that it's much harder to play interestingly on the original changes and say something, than to play BS on BS changes. Let's hear what you can do on the original changes....

 

[NJL]

I submit that it's much harder to play interestingly on the original changes and say something, than to play BS on BS changes. Let's hear what you can do on the original changes....

+1,000,000

 

[Pacman]

Shhh, NJL!!


(He's heard me play, and knows how bad I suck!)

 

[NJL]

you know the worst part about your type is that you play the changes! you're just soooooooooo boring!

 

[geoffkhan]

This goes right back to Lynn's comment. Because you can't (or, to give the benefit of the doubt, won't) come up with interesting stuff to play on the original changes, you've got to do something to add interest. I submit that it's much harder to play interestingly on the original changes and say something, than to play BS on BS changes. Let's hear what you can do on the original changes....

Hmmm, I'll see what I can come up with.