Jazz lessons online/instructional stuff

kelpbeds

viz said:

imalrightjack said:

Jalapeno said:

Once you get used to not playing 145 it's a lot easier to hear what's going on.  Slipping in accidentals (by ear) becomes second nature in soloing - b9, #9, #11, 13 etc

There's no reason NOT to learn the theory, but it's more rewarding if you don't start there as it can be daunting.

How would you advise approaching, say, a 2-5-1?  Switch between modes for each?  I.e. Dorian, Mixolydian, Ionian?

No. You just play in the key of the 1. It’s just a progression not a sequence of modulations  

So in C major, you don’t suddenly switch to D dorian, G mixo, C major - switching key and mode at the same time, using modes that happen to use the same as the parent key’s ionian. That’s totally the wrong way to think of the flow of music. It’s all in C major, and you play a TUNE that fits with the harmony flowing underneath. (Unless the changes are SO slow that your brain really settles into each chord for half a minute or so)

The notes happen to fit D dorian and G mixo, but that’s purely because those notes are in C major. It’s called functional harmony. Like when we say I ii iii IV V vi vii*.

Modes are just an extension of that, filling the gaps between the triads: I ii(raised 6) iii(lowered 2nd), IV(aug 4th), V(lowered 7th), vi, vii(lowered 2nd and diminished 5th). 

I agree with most of this but not entirely about 'You play in the key of the 1' . It certainly isn't modal and modes should be 'pretty much' reserved for modal playing (with exceptions!). I think a lot of the problem is that people confuse chord scales for modes. And thinking of a 2-5-1 using chord scales is a good thing to do. However, it's not good just to blindy follow chord tones as stated. But mixing chord tones with tension tones can give you really strong lines. Especially when we use voice leading. And not thinking in terms of chord tones won't help us to produce strongly voice led lines. Resolving down a semitone from one chord tone to another when the chord changes is particularly strong. So although we can think of it just in C major I don't think that will give us the best results to produce strong lines. I think it's better to use a chord scale approach and try to voice lead. Charlie Parker, for example, did this a lot as did loads of others. Just playing in C major doesn't really lend itself to  creating these strong lines. 

GuyBoden

I agree with most of this but not entirely about 'You play in the key of the 1' . It certainly isn't modal and modes should be 'pretty much' reserved for modal playing (with exceptions!). I think a lot of the problem is that people confuse chord scales for modes. And thinking of a 2-5-1 using chord scales is a good thing to do. However, it's not good just to blindy follow chord tones as stated. But mixing chord tones with tension tones can give you really strong lines. Especially when we use voice leading. And not thinking in terms of chord tones won't help us to produce strongly voice led lines. Resolving down a semitone from one chord tone to another when the chord changes is particularly strong. So although we can think of it just in C major I don't think that will give us the best results to produce strong lines. I think it's better to use a chord scale approach and try to voice lead. Charlie Parker, for example, did this a lot as did loads of others. Just playing in C major doesn't really lend itself to  creating these strong lines.

Charlie Parker didn't use the Chord Scale Theory you're advocating, the Chord Scale Theory came from George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept and latter by Berklee college. Charlie Parker died in 1955.

Charlie Parker's style was playing in each key with approach notes and enclosures around a chord's tones (notes).

https://www.bestsaxophonewebsiteever.com/chad-lefkowitz-browns-approach-notes-enclosures-jazz-improv-technique/

The problem I see is that Chord Scale Theory is taught to most students, and they then apply it to everything they play. IMHO, using this method of a scale for every Chord is lazy teaching, because it's simple to teach to students. Easy money.

Chord Scale Theory is not the best approach for old style Jazz standards (Pre 1960), but great for modern Jazz compositions.

wizbit81

Right, there's a hell of a lot of misinformation around on the internet when it comes to playing jazz. It's an incredibly hard thing to do properly and authentically and it requires a lot of fundamentals that about 99% of guitar players have totally ignored over the years. If you try to do it without knowing those it's like flying in a hurricane with no instruments. By far your best bet is finding a competant jazzer who teaches, and then getting 121 lessons. 
I can recommend Nic Svarc if you look for him on Facebook. Fantastic player, hugely knowledgeable, and doing loads of Skype stuff during lockdown. Of course there are a million guys out there, feel free to do your own research, but make sure they can play the stuff you want to learn beforehand. Lots of teachers say they can teach jazz, but they have zero grasp of the language, theory, fundamentals etc, and are, frankly, bluffers. I'll say it again....please if you want to do this invest in a proper 121 teacher. 

wizbit81

Oh, and prepare for years of work. There's no way to avoid that

imalrightjack

I’ve found a teacher. Positive start. Hard work! 

wizbit81

imalrightjack said:

I’ve found a teacher. Positive start. Hard work! 

Great, good luck with it all!

Jalapeno

Good - if he starts banging on about modes or chord/scale ditch him immediately !

Arpeggios and passing notes are where it's at.

And arpeggios are a big enough mountain to climb in the beginning IMHO

kelpbeds

GuyBoden said:

I agree with most of this but not entirely about 'You play in the key of the 1' . It certainly isn't modal and modes should be 'pretty much' reserved for modal playing (with exceptions!). I think a lot of the problem is that people confuse chord scales for modes. And thinking of a 2-5-1 using chord scales is a good thing to do. However, it's not good just to blindy follow chord tones as stated. But mixing chord tones with tension tones can give you really strong lines. Especially when we use voice leading. And not thinking in terms of chord tones won't help us to produce strongly voice led lines. Resolving down a semitone from one chord tone to another when the chord changes is particularly strong. So although we can think of it just in C major I don't think that will give us the best results to produce strong lines. I think it's better to use a chord scale approach and try to voice lead. Charlie Parker, for example, did this a lot as did loads of others. Just playing in C major doesn't really lend itself to  creating these strong lines.

Charlie Parker didn't use the Chord Scale Theory you're advocating, the Chord Scale Theory came from George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept and latter by Berklee college. Charlie Parker died in 1955.

Charlie Parker's style was playing in each key with approach notes and enclosures around a chord's tones (notes).

https://www.bestsaxophonewebsiteever.com/chad-lefkowitz-browns-approach-notes-enclosures-jazz-improv-technique/

The problem I see is that Chord Scale Theory is taught to most students, and they then apply it to everything they play. IMHO, using this method of a scale for every Chord is lazy teaching, because it's simple to teach to students. Easy money.

Chord Scale Theory is not the best approach for old style Jazz standards (Pre 1960), but great for modern Jazz compositions.

What I meant to say was that Charlie Parker used a lot of voice leading -my statement was a little ambiguous I agree.
 What I was trying to point out is that following a chord scale approach and voice leading appropriately will give you strong lines -though there is nothing wrong with, for example, quoting lines from other tunes to come up with melodic lines or constructing melodic lines by hearing them first. I enjoy both methods but tend to prefer CST I like the fact that is a bit like a mathematical puzzle to me and that's how my brain works I guess.

Blueingreen

The idea that because guys in the 40s and 50s didn't use CST we shouldn't use CST is an oversimplification. I depends how you want to sound.  When John Scofield teaches how to improvise on "Softly As In Morning Sunrise" he discusses it purely in CST terms.  But he's not teaching us how to play like it's 1955: he's assuming you want to play like a contemporary player.  Likewise Rosenwinkel talks a lot about creative use of pentatonics.

Some guys love that 40s/50s/early 60s bop style and they want to play like that.  They're not interested in what came after. Nothing wrong with that, and if you're one of them you should be conscious that the guys you're trying to sound like were not thinking in CST terms. 

I can enjoy that kind of playing when other people do it well, but personally I have no interested in faithfully reproducing the styles of 70 years ago.  A lot of more contemporary players ARE thinking in CST terms, at least some of the time.  If you want to sound like them, CST will be useful. Even if I want to listen to someone play standards I’d much rather hear Rosenwinkle’s Standards Trio than some younger guy trying to sound like Grant Green or Jim Hall.

kelpbeds

The thing I like about CST is that it attempts to decode jazz harmony where other approaches are much more 'feel' based. The comment 'You've just got to hear it man' springs to mind and to me that doesn't really help people especially when they can't just 'hear it' . 

GuyBoden

Blueingreen said:

The idea that because guys in the 40s and 50s didn't use CST we shouldn't use CST is an oversimplification. I depends how you want to sound.  When John Scofield teaches how to improvise on "Softly As In Morning Sunrise" he discusses it purely in CST terms.  But he's not teaching us how to play like it's 1955: he's assuming you want to play like a contemporary player.  Likewise Rosenwinkel talks a lot about creative use of pentatonics.

Some guys love that 40s/50s/early 60s bop style and they want to play like that.  They're not interested in what came after. Nothing wrong with that, and if you're one of them you should be conscious that the guys you're trying to sound like were not thinking in CST terms. 

I can enjoy that kind of playing when other people do it well, but personally I have no interested in faithfully reproducing the styles of 70 years ago.  A lot of more contemporary players ARE thinking in CST terms, at least some of the time.  If you want to sound like them, CST will be useful. Even if I want to listen to someone play standards I’d much rather hear Rosenwinkle’s Standards Trio than some younger guy trying to sound like Grant Green or Jim Hall.

@Blueingreen your chosen name says it all, it was the beginnings of Modal Jazz, but yes it does depend on as you stated "how you want to sound", so transcribing from your fav recordings is, as always, the best approach.

You won't sound like Pre 1960's Jazz using the Chord Scale Theory approach, but you might not want to.

imalrightjack

For anybody interested, my teacher is @Brad - and I'm really enjoying his approach.

I'll report back when I'm amazing at this jazz lark.  It might be a decade or two.