dp2 Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Well, if I were a carpenter ........., I'd use both metric and the standard tool set. I don't look at this as three different sets of tools (natural, melodic, harmonic scales\diatonic chords), only a wider range of possibilities using scales\diatonic chords that just happen to share some of the same tones. Some would look at this (composing in minor) as having more and richer possibilities. What was the question again? I agree. I also think it gives a performer (especially while improvising) the freedom to express ones thoughts/feelings to set a particular mood. Why not go up a run using melodic minor, and come back down using harmonic minor? Why not play them both together (to represent confusion or a lot of activity) for a single chord? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz+ Posted May 29, 2007 Author Share Posted May 29, 2007 Yeah, we wouldn't want to see the forrest as a whole. Yeah, it's better a painter juggles three seperate palettes of colors instead of one that holds all of those colors at once. Harry Likas was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book." Find 700 of Harry’s piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and jazz piano tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Horne Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Yeah, we wouldn't want to see the forrest as a whole. Yeah, it's better a painter juggles three seperate palettes of colors instead of one that holds all of those colors at once. Pleeese. You can play or compose in major and still use colors from its parallel minor, using a iiø7 chord in major for example to spice things up a tad. Some call that a mixing of modes. Does that upset the separate palette cart? Painting ... carpentry ... no wonder the concept of using the diatonic chords associated with more than one flavor of minor is confusing. Perhaps this will all be addressed with the Grand Unified Theory. No guitarists were harmed during the making of this message. In general, harmonic complexity is inversely proportional to the ratio between chording and non-chording instruments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DafDuc Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Look at it this way, if I am a carpenter I don't want to have to continuously borrow essential tools from three different tool boxes. I want one tool box that contains all my tools. The melodic minor is the tool box that contains all the essential diatonic chords in minor harmony, no "borrowing" is needed. The really big toolkit the pros use - the one that takes you through 4 semesters of college theory and beyond - has ALL the tools in it. Ditto the really large box of Crayolas. As long as we're taking silly analogies far past their logical conclusions... I played in an 8 piece horn band. We would often get bored. So...three words: "Tower of Polka." - Calumet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatoboy Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 YES, I'm in work and can't get into it now..... btw, I'm sure alot of you have much more knowledge that I do...it was my impression the the Natural minor should be the basis....but my ear really got me to that conslusion! lb CP-50, YC 73, FP-80, PX5-S, NE-5d61, Kurzweil SP6, XK-3, CX-3, Hammond XK-3, Yamaha YUX Upright, '66 B3/Leslie 145/122 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatoboy Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 I felt that way too espically being a blues player.... funny thing was while doing work around the house and remembering the thread... I sat down at the piano and I played a C-, F- and a G- .... then I played them a w/ a b7 C-7, F-7 and G-7.... They sounded so good! and I was like a revelation, finally relieved of the iV, V Dom blues burden in some inner concept I had....I realized then the Natural minor was the Mother minor I think! So yeah! it was 'funny' to me too!lb CP-50, YC 73, FP-80, PX5-S, NE-5d61, Kurzweil SP6, XK-3, CX-3, Hammond XK-3, Yamaha YUX Upright, '66 B3/Leslie 145/122 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfD Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Here is my contribution in helping this thread reach 20 pages or more. How many of you approach composition and construct solos under this type of analysis? I would hope these discussions are strictly thinking out loud and/or about what was played after the fact. The real question is, how does a musician get their signature sound? Y'know, that thing where you listen to a recording and know it is them. PD "The greatest thing you'll ever learn, is just to love and be loved in return."--E. Ahbez "Nature Boy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatoboy Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Profd, The real question is, how does a musician get their signature sound? I've thought about this, I think I personally have a two fold process, a subliminial process and a cognative one (duh!). Personally, I have a very strong subconscious (sleepwalker as a kid), even though I have good cognative skills also, I shy away from work and it pushes me away from a pure theory approach. I can be lazy and have to fight 'that' like many of us to get moving forward. But my 'background' mind and ears are picking things up even about myself! Somwhere inbetween the cognative and my subconscience is 'me'! You do have to be careful about that I feel! To much of either side of the equation and 'puff'! no you! A prequsite to all this is that your playing (& sessioning) regularly (daily, weekly)! I think many times, you have to accept your personality to find your signature and if you are surrounded by conventions of playing or sound, no matter how high-fly they may or may not be.... it can take you off the trial to your signature...but those very conventions can help lead you there, it's not that easy to anwser! Varies from person to person! Everyones skills, innate ability, personality, egos, and emotions are all different. You can't be afraid to play yourself! Things are pretty pattern driven these days in alot of life! Patterns for success based on conventions of success can really through you off! lb CP-50, YC 73, FP-80, PX5-S, NE-5d61, Kurzweil SP6, XK-3, CX-3, Hammond XK-3, Yamaha YUX Upright, '66 B3/Leslie 145/122 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DafDuc Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 The real question is, how does a musician get their signature sound? I think it mostly boils down to finding the right knife to stab your keyboard with. And developing a stabbing technique that fits both the knife you've chosen and your own personal motif. If you use a generic knife, you'll just sound like all the other keyboard stabbers... I played in an 8 piece horn band. We would often get bored. So...three words: "Tower of Polka." - Calumet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Horne Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 http://www.ohgizmo.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/swiss-army-everything.jpg works for me No guitarists were harmed during the making of this message. In general, harmonic complexity is inversely proportional to the ratio between chording and non-chording instruments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatoboy Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 alright 'nevermind'! CP-50, YC 73, FP-80, PX5-S, NE-5d61, Kurzweil SP6, XK-3, CX-3, Hammond XK-3, Yamaha YUX Upright, '66 B3/Leslie 145/122 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 the 'o' you put after chords, are you indicating that should be a natural? or is it referring to the diminished chord? The ° symbol denotes diminished. A C° chord would be a C diminished chord (C, Eb, Gb). A line through that symbol ( ø ) denotes a half diminished 7th chord. A Cø7 chord would be spelled C, Eb, Gb, Bb while a C°7 chord would be C, Eb, Gb, Bbb. While an A would sound the same as a Bbb in a C°7 chord, the name of the chord is derived from the interval encompassing that chord, a diminished 7th. Don't try and explain this to guitar players, life is only so long, enjoy the time you have. Watch it, buddy. You're talking to a guitar player that grasps the concept perfectly well... A bunch of loud, obnoxious music I USED to make with friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanker. Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 the 'o' you put after chords, are you indicating that should be a natural? or is it referring to the diminished chord? The ° symbol denotes diminished. A C° chord would be a C diminished chord (C, Eb, Gb). A line through that symbol ( ø ) denotes a half diminished 7th chord. A Cø7 chord would be spelled C, Eb, Gb, Bb while a C°7 chord would be C, Eb, Gb, Bbb. While an A would sound the same as a Bbb in a C°7 chord, the name of the chord is derived from the interval encompassing that chord, a diminished 7th. Don't try and explain this to guitar players, life is only so long, enjoy the time you have. Watch it, buddy. You're talking to a guitar player that grasps the concept perfectly well... Which part? A ROMpler is just a polyphonic turntable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatoboy Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 they (1,4,5) sound better as min7's. . . .you get a heavier major sound that way.... maybe it was just that. . . !lb CP-50, YC 73, FP-80, PX5-S, NE-5d61, Kurzweil SP6, XK-3, CX-3, Hammond XK-3, Yamaha YUX Upright, '66 B3/Leslie 145/122 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz+ Posted May 29, 2007 Author Share Posted May 29, 2007 Where does vi half diminished come from in diatonic minor scale harmony? Harry Likas was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book." Find 700 of Harry’s piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and jazz piano tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Watch it, buddy. You're talking to a guitar player that grasps the concept perfectly well... Which part? Well, I'm very familiar with diminished, half diminished, etc. chords, and I have never had trouble reading double-flats or double-sharps for what they are, nor was I ever confused with the reasoning behind their nomenclature. Just because half the guitarists on the planet don't read music, doesn't mean the other half don't... A bunch of loud, obnoxious music I USED to make with friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatoboy Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 yeah, the V7 to I(tonic) resolution argument is pretty persuasive i suppose, but you could (I believe) resolve also from a Vmin7 to the I. . . like I said, I'm not a music theorist.... is a V-7 to a minor I a valid resolution! I really don not know to be honest! I kinda jumped into this thread 'peg-legged' and interested! lb CP-50, YC 73, FP-80, PX5-S, NE-5d61, Kurzweil SP6, XK-3, CX-3, Hammond XK-3, Yamaha YUX Upright, '66 B3/Leslie 145/122 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz+ Posted May 29, 2007 Author Share Posted May 29, 2007 In this common minor harmy progression, which C minor scale did the C-6 and A-7 b5 come from? ||: C-6 A-7b5 | D-7b5 G7b9 : || Harry Likas was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book." Find 700 of Harry’s piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and jazz piano tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatoboy Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 melodic! ok! so this is 'mixed' modeing??? in regards to the progression? CP-50, YC 73, FP-80, PX5-S, NE-5d61, Kurzweil SP6, XK-3, CX-3, Hammond XK-3, Yamaha YUX Upright, '66 B3/Leslie 145/122 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Horne Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Where does vi half diminished come from in diatonic minor scale harmony? In C minor a viø7 chord (A, C, Eb, G) occurs naturally in the C ascending melodic minor scale. No guitarists were harmed during the making of this message. In general, harmonic complexity is inversely proportional to the ratio between chording and non-chording instruments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DafDuc Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Where does vi half diminished come from in diatonic minor scale harmony? Its function most often is as a II half-dim of V, and is used in temporary modulations or as a lead-in to a V/V. Sometimes it involves chromatic movements - often these get analyzed as non-harmonic tones rather than as part of the harmony, though to our modern ears, it's a familiar harmony. My theory prof continually repeated that a vi-half-dim was not a chord that was used IN THAT FUNCTION in common practice. She stopped short of rapping my knuckles (Catholic college, LOL) for calling it a vi-half-dim, but only just. And that's ultimately what's up with a lot of the "sounds-normal-to-me" patter in this thread - our ears have been colored by pop / rock / folk / ethnic / blues / jazz listening. Late nineteenth and early-late twentieth century classical music worked very hard to escape the "tyranny of the leading tone". Classical, because of the need to move on, pop, because of it's squareness. And ethnic music was a great way to move off the leading tone (or, in the case of Gypsy, Hungarian, and Israeli, at least take it to a new place), because it WAS natural sounding. Again, remember the modes FAR predated the common practice period. It was the common practice period that codified the leading tone's role, and helped us move past modes. But the modes also helped us move past the tyranny of the leading tone. Daf I played in an 8 piece horn band. We would often get bored. So...three words: "Tower of Polka." - Calumet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kad Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 [quote=Griffinator Watch it, buddy. You're talking to a guitar player that grasps the concept perfectly well... I'm a recovering guitar player. Reality is like the sun - you can block it out for a time but it ain't goin' away... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz+ Posted May 29, 2007 Author Share Posted May 29, 2007 Daf, I don't really agree with your old Catholic school music teacher that vi half diminished is not a chord that is used. She's talking about a long time ago (Bach & Mozart). Times change, here are some well known examples from the 20th century American songbook and jazz standards: measures 3 and 4 of Angel Eyes | D- B-7b5 | E-7b5 A7b9 | in Yesterdays by Jerome Kern | D- B-7b5 | E-7b5 A7 | in Minority | F-6 | D-7b5 | G-7b5 | C7b9 | in Sugar by Stanley Turrentine | C- A-7b5 | D-7b5 G7b9 | in Round Midnight by Thelonious Monk | Eb- C-7b5 | F-7b5 Bb7 | in the soloing changes to Django by John Lewis | F- D-7b5 | G-7b5 C7 | Don't Explain - | D- B-7b5 | E-7b5 A7b9 | Lullaby Of Birdland - George Shearing | F- D-7b5 | G7 C7b9 | Harry Likas was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book." Find 700 of Harry’s piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and jazz piano tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz+ Posted May 29, 2007 Author Share Posted May 29, 2007 Where does vi half diminished come from in diatonic minor scale harmony? In C minor a viø7 chord (A, C, Eb, G) occurs naturally in the C ascending melodic minor scale. Thank you. We have confirmed that viø7 is used and it occurs only in melodic minor. Furthermore, all the diatonic chords in both natural minor and harmonic also occur naturaly in melodic minor. That's my point that nobody seems to like or agree with. . Harry Likas was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book." Find 700 of Harry’s piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and jazz piano tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DafDuc Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 She was talking common practice. You obviously aren't. I thought you wanted to know about common practice. That's what you started the thread talking about. And you left out Tales of Brave Ulysses. I played in an 8 piece horn band. We would often get bored. So...three words: "Tower of Polka." - Calumet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz+ Posted May 29, 2007 Author Share Posted May 29, 2007 That's not what I started the thread about, I know all about "common pratice" (1600 till about 1900). I am now talking about what is practice in the 20th century American songbook with composers such as Gershwin, Cole Porter, Jerome Kern, etc. Harry Likas was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book." Find 700 of Harry’s piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and jazz piano tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 In this common minor harmy progression, which C minor scale did the C-6 and A-7 b5 come from? ||: C-6 A-7b5 | D-7b5 G7b9 : || The melodic minor, of course. C-6 = C Eb G A, and is nothing more than a first inversion of A-7b5 (A C Eb G) A bunch of loud, obnoxious music I USED to make with friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DafDuc Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Thank you. We have confirmed that viø7 is used and it occurs only in melodic minor. In pop music. Furthermore, all the diatonic chords in both natural minor and harmonic also occur naturaly in melodic minor. That's my point that nobody seems to like or agree with. Vii diminished doesn't - because it contains elements of both ascending and descending melodic minor at the same time. So your theory only works IF YOU IGNORE THE FUNCTION of the notes in melodic minor scale, and just treat it like an aggregation of notes. And we haven't even gotten to voicing yet. Diminished triads and half diminished chords rarely (if ever) had the root in the bass in common practice. -d- I played in an 8 piece horn band. We would often get bored. So...three words: "Tower of Polka." - Calumet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DafDuc Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 I know all about "common pratice" (1600 till about 1900). So you've had college theory? Why were you quoting a high school theory book then? I played in an 8 piece horn band. We would often get bored. So...three words: "Tower of Polka." - Calumet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz+ Posted May 29, 2007 Author Share Posted May 29, 2007 Ellington, Gershwin, Porter, Kern where all post the 1770-1900 "common practice" period. Those are my guys and we cannot discount them by calling them pop music composers. The Mozart and Beethoven were also popular with people in their time. And yes, my theory considers the melodic minor (ascending & descending forms ) as an aggregation of notes. I do not claim it's ascending and descending formula must be maintained when deriving harmony from it. That is some rule you might find in older theory. Harry Likas was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book." Find 700 of Harry’s piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and jazz piano tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.