Cool.
N is a really great tune to study, it shows Shorter's penchant for mediant harmonic solutions.
Bar 7 > 8 > 9
Bbm7(b5) > Eb7(b9,#11) > Emaj7 (which is the mediant of Ab (or Abmin).

Have you had a listen to the Manhattan Project version?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_57Ul0KpVM

Chris, listening specifically to Pettrucianni's solo, it sounds like he just interpreted this as minor ii-V's. All the unusual harmonies disappeared. I guess he went truly horizontal here.

But these harmonic wanderings of the original are what gives it a little more interest than your typical tune.

Dave, good to see you stop by. If you have some recordings of Goodbye Pork Pie Hat or Nefertiti, now's the time to post it...

No, we aren't agreed here, and this is the problem. The ii V I is not going to Fm, but to B, which makes an interesting case the the Gm7b5. It is a tritone sub of the Db. so the ii v I is actually a V/V V I of B (or Cb), and in this case the note A is not used in the scale over the Db, because that would make it a m6, suggesting natural minor (ha!) rather than melodic minor.

Fight? Fight?

In any case, I'm now more concerned about the middle four bars starting on that Cbmaj (Bmaj) because it is this section that for me sounds better as reharm rather than what is written. So now I need to find some better stuff to define the tonal centres here.

The hardest part about playing this tune for me is not playing the melody with the chords, because everything now seems to fit, but when I start to think of making a coherent line that indicates some sort of musical intelligence beyond knowing this chord, then this chord, then these two chords together etc, and goes more towards really understanding the harmonic form as a whole.

I absolutely agree.

When are we going to hear more people post their versions?

Scep, a V Chord doesn't assume that it goes to the tonic. So I don't know why you would say B-7b5 C7b9 would resolve to B. B is not the resolution here. The ii-V sets up for a modulation to B, which if we are to talk about relative majors, is a minor third from Ab to B.

I hear this modulation in my ears and I actually have no problem with this melodically.

I'm less certain of the ending. I don't hear that as well and have not found a good melodic structure to guide me other than vertical playing.

I never said that. The chords you've used here are wrong. Db (or C#) to C (tritone sub of F#) to B is what I said. Also, what other function do V chords have, if not to create the tension that eventually resolves to a I, or something acting as a I? I don't know how many other ways I can say the same thing! IF it is a two five one, it goes to B. However, it LOOKS like a ii V of F, but it never goes there. That is the deception. So, as I said from the beginning, the Gm7b5 is NOT really a ii of F, but a v of v of B as a tritone sub.

Are you saying that the B is not a temporary tonic? If not, what is it?

If you are saying it is a temporary tonic, then you agree with me, no?


er... so it appears you understand it modulates to B...or no?...

So we're not confused, I'm talking about ChrisBell's changes as it appears in some Realbooks:

Quote from Chris:
Listening and then trying out in my own version I must say that I prefer a Bbm7(b5) in bar7, instead of a AMaj7. In actually 'corrects' the harmonic movement.
Gm7(b5) > C7(b9) > BMaj7 (B substitution F) bar 4>5>6
Bbm7(b5)> Eb7(b9)> EMaj7 (E substitution Bb) bar 7>8>9


IF the above changes are followed, then the tune has been converted to two sets of minor ii-V's. Regardless of what follows after.

I didn't say I agree that this should be done. I'm just saying that this is the consequence of following these changes.

I listened to the different versions, and SOMETIMES, they imply a minor ii-V movement. Petrucciana soloed like it was. Herbie comped along these lines in the middle of the tune.

This is a "simplification" of the tune IMHO, which can be good or bad. But the point is that I hear Herbie going this route, at least temporarily.

I learned this with the original changes (with the AMaj7#11) and so far, I liked how it sounds and it's what I hear Herbie doing initially in the two versions I have.

I found a great post about Nef on the All About Jazz forums. This one is by Ed Byrne who was probably the most accomplished in-depth jazzer on that board. Extremely insightful knowledge:

Nefertiti

Lots of good ideas presented here.

I can't find the thread that is referenced regarding my previous remarks on Nefertiti. Can someone point me to that? I started to write a bunch of (new) heavy analytical stuff on this, and then resisted. My approach to actually improvising on a specific tune is as specific to that given piece as possible--and as simple as I can make it, while attempting to capture its essence.

This tune is in Ab throughout, essentially exhibiting late 19th century extended harmony in which tonal chord relationships are subtle, complicated, and obscure.

It's theme is comprised of a single melodic motive (the first antecedent phrase), followed by an elaboration on its two final notes--moved in the opposite (upward) direction as a consequent (answer) phrase. The primary motive, when developed in the tune's second half, contains slightly altered intervals (major third interval replacing the perfect fourth). On its repeat, the motive is transposed and altered (see above); and its consequent phrase (answer) is elongated and developed further.

There are many ways of approaching playing on this piece, but since I usually seek to simplify the thinking and get to the heart of the composition, I first attempt to capture its essential ideas for development in improvisation.

I view the A at the first phrase ending (mm.7-8) as a fulcrum of sorts (a transition point which sets up the second half), which highlights the functional dominant (or substitute dominant) of the piece. Therefore, I leave that out of the pitch collection I use for the first half. I call this in Linear Jazz Improvisation Method a Melody Pitch Collection:

Octachord for measures 1-7: Ab, Bb, B, C, Db, Eb, F, G, Ab.

In measure 8, the Eb7 is a dominant chord, and the A acts as a pivot to the song's second half, which is a repeat and slight development (and elongation) of the first half:

Nonachord: A, A#, B, C#, D, E, F#, G, G#, A.

Since both the B in the first 1/2 and the G and Bb in the second 1/2 are non-harmonic tones, they could be omitted. However, these chromatic passing tones are a significant factor in the opening motive's descending gesture.

Since these pcs are derived directly from the theme, you can't go wrong, and it goes directly to the heart of the piece. If any notes do not agree locally with the chords below, it would only be momentarily and would resolve as the overall phrase unfolds.

Another way of approaching Melody PCs in LJI on 20th century-style tunes in which the melody is comprised mostly of 9ths, 11ths, and 13ths of some kind or another is to add the melody notes to the chord tones of each local chord. For example, in adding the second measure's melody notes, Bb, F, C, and Eb to the chord tones, Db, F, Ab, and C, you get the composite Hexachord pc which follows: Db, Eb, F, Ab, Bb, C, and Db.

While at once less tedious than CST, and more tedious than my first approach above, it still eliminates many of the un-needed notes which CST would suggest. In addition, the gaps (leaps) that this last approach suggests tends towards more melodicism than do 7-note scales, which can often add melodic clutter by giving too much (often unnecessary) conjunct (step-wise) information.

These suggestions, of course, are mere starting points. But in the woodshed I would sit at the piano, play the chords, and sing pseudo-improvisations on these pcs, orally composing my solutions--along with many variants. Once internalized through this vocal process, I would begin to work it all out on my horn by running choruses on it.

This is Ed's post about Nefertiti harmony:


Nefertiti Harmonic Analysis

||: AbMA7 | DbMA7 | Gm7-5 | C7-9 |
||: IMA7 | IVMA7 | ii7-5/vi | V7/vi (subV7/bIII) |

| BMA7 | Bbm7 | AMA7 | Eb7 |
| bIIIMA7 | ii7 | bIIMA7 | V7 |

| EMA7 | A7sus4 | D7+9/Bb | E7 |
| bVMA7 | bII7sus4 | bV7 | subV7 |

| E7sus4 | Eb7 | A7 | A7 :||
| subV7/V7 | subV7 | subV7 :||

This is not a non-functional chord succession. This tune is neither atonal nor non-functional; it is an example of “Extended Harmony” of the late 19th century. While the chords go to obscure places, they are nonetheless largely functional in a tonal context in the key of Ab throughout.
__________________


I agree with his last sentence, the song is in Ab major.

.

Wiz, I can't see how he can just say Ab Major. I wish.

As much as I try to keep it in Ab Major, I'm sure the melody will disagree

However, it is a thought though. As I listened to the Manhattan Project version, clearly they chose to simplify in the soloing. The originals never had solos so you really don't know what they planned here.

But if you stuck closely to the melody, then it cannot stay in Ab. And that's the gist of my problem with this. Yes there's a lot of common tones with Ab and horizontally that could be an approach, past the melody. However, if we are to stick to the melody as a guide, it's tough to simplify it like this. I mean it must be obvious that the melody notes B, E, F#, A, D, etc. are not in Ab.

I just spent a little bit of time tonight and the second half is a tough nut to crack.

Dave F., look at the final changes I've been using up above somewhere. It's pretty close to what you're saying. It's kind of a mix of the different changes I've seen. The one that Wiz posted is a little simplified though. Like no mention of the #11's in the dominants (but are clearly in the melody). The #11's in the Major 7ths of course can be assumed.

Other than that, this is pretty close. I've stayed away from the 'Dbsus' versions. Those didn't make sense to me.

Tonal centre/key of Ab? I agree to that.

@wizard: Thanks for the theory post, very interesting.

To all: maybe we could all agree to never speak of using a Dbsus7 in bar2 ever again??

I like using Ab sus in bar 2. So it's a 2 bar progression from Ab maj #4 - Ab sus.

It happens 3 times in the melody, on bar 1-2, 8-9, 10-11.

I think of 8-9 as E maj #4- E sus, and 10-11 ....can't remember off the top but same progression.

Glad you guys found it useful, I did as well.


wee, yes the 2nd half tonal centre shifts from Ab major, but the melodic motif remains the same.

I just listened to Miles Davis In a Silent Way for the first time.... man, blew me away. That cat was a genius.

And this is Herbie's "tribute" solo to Miles from the documentary Miles Davis Electric: A different Kind of Blue.

Fascinating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1aChk3TC00&feature=related

I found an excellent piano version of Nefertiti on Itunes --

Michel Camilo

except the tune is in 6/8 (I think)

http://www.amazon.com/Nefertiti/dp/B00150CRKU

It's not Nerf, but there is some wicked piano playing to be heard:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuI0-HL8xCQ
KJ Trio

@Jazzwee: thanks for the Michel Camilo tip, the whole album is actually really good!

According to this blog post here are the chords according to Herbie Hancock. Though as it says at the end of the post; "Hancock confirmed that Shorter often wrote out chord voicings and omitted chord symbols" . . . interesting.

And yes, they do sound good (a lot of quartal voicings):
Bar 1. The notes D, G, C above Ab

2. The notes C, F, Bb, above Ab, Db, Gb

3. G half-diminished seventh

4. C seventh altered (with Ab, and Db in the chord)

5. D#, G#, C# above B

6. F, A#, D# above B

7. Bb half-diminished

8. Eb seventh altered (with Cb and Fb in the chord)

9. E major seventh

10. A seven sus 4(13) (D triad plus G over A)

11. C, F, Bb, in the top, Bb and F# in the left hand

12. E triad over D and F# (no A)

13. B minor 9th

14. C, Db, F, A over Eb

15. Bb minor with a major seventh

16. Eb seventh altered (with Cb and Fb in the chord)

Interesting Chris.

And Herbie played so "freely" that I'm not sure at which moment he played these voicings

As I'm playing this solo piano style, I'm finding that I'm not using quartal voicings as much as I thought I would. I wanted to make sure the chord qualities were clear in my head so I went with more clustered voicings.

I wish there was a solo piano of this to listen to so I get some ideas of how to make this rhythmically interesting. Right now, I'm just playing it more ballad style.

.

Hey Dave, why did you think of applying these voicings to a lower register? I listened to Herbie in the two versions I have (the original and VSOP) and he's playing in the middle register. And he's not playing the melody of course.

I'm currently using thicker voicings in the middle based on the Michel Camilo version. This at least I can hear this well. The original versions have a very light piano volume.

I haven't had a chance to try out your ideas yet. I'll do so tonight.

Good day,
I wish I knew better what the heck you guys are talking about. I need to study more.

Additionally, I am still stuck at GBPPH. Not a particularly easy piece to navigate, but fun to play despite laspes in rhythm and time. Please go easy on me.

http://www.box.net/shared/bi40biraai

A Bit of Stride Style

http://www.box.net/shared/xc7dr7475i

Glen

.

Sounds like it's coming together Glen! That's a great start and it did sound like you were enjoying yourself. You had really nice voicings there. The changes to GBPPH are a bit hard to remember because it's so long so I have that same problem with the form.

Unfortunately, I kind of left GBPPH while I started Nefertiti so now I have to rememorize the changes. Now GBPPH should be easy for you because you're good at a blues sound (love your slides )


I probably preferred how you played it the 1st time. The stride one didn't sound like GBPPH...

BTW - I think GBPPH is easier to figure out than Nefertiti.

I'm a little busy so no time to record yet...but you win an award for being one of the first ones.

Thanks, Jazzwee!

I will continue to work on GBPPH to bring it in better time and better expand it harmonically by changing the inversions and voicings I used on the first run.

The second piece was a quick, on-the-fly composition in a semi-stride-style. Yes, it has nothing in common with GBPPH.

Glen

LOL! I thought it was some GBPPH reharm that was very far from the original


I tried to remember GBPPH again today so I played it for a bit so I don't forget but I don't really have it completely memorized yet.

Back to Nef


So the rest of the time I focused on Nefertiti, which is really coming along now. The tonality is clear in my head so fresh lines are starting to come out. With this one, I realize the left hand has to be quite gentle as it can overpower the solo. With most of the harmony played below middle C, it left room for the RH to move around.

I had to experiment with different voicings so I don't jump around too much.

What the real problem, I realized was the lack of some rhythmic driver in the LH. Since I don't have a rhythm section here, there has to be some constant beat. I always strive to have a clear rhythm in my head or my solo starts to sound random.

A lot of the harmony is best heard played as "footballs" because of the long drawn out melody, I thought. I didn't really want to play this as a ballad. And pedal was really bad here. So I have to do some LH experimentation. Initially I was playing with one of the inner voices tap out a quarter note pulse (ala Mehldau). But the touch required was so light that I need to practice it more.

Ahhh...the difficulties of Solo piano. All the Youtube versions played to Carter's backing track. Like Sceptical, I really wanted to learn this as a solo piano piece, something it clearly wasn't intended to be. So there lies the challenge.

Solo piano ideas anyone?

BTW Glen, you mentioned that you don't understand what we're talking about. I'm just curious, how to do you determine what to play against each chord or even voicings? Is this all by ear?

What we're talking about can probably be culled from this source:
http://www.apassion4jazz.net/jazz-chords-scales.html

It's just basic stuff. But if you have the ear for this, it's amazing. I find it hard to do it by ear on something like Nefertiti. Easier on GBPPH.

Have you ever tried playing Giant Steps? That's when you really have to be quick thinking about chords vs. scales.

Hi Jazzwee,

Thanks for that link - there is a great deal of information there!

My upbringing as it pertains to Jazz revolved around the old standards, not too much beyond that - I am just now starting to reach beyond that point in Jazz history and with more modern harmonic/melodic structures.

Consequently, I have a tendency to keep close to the melody line (and it's always been one that's had lyrics) unless I am creating a composition on my own - I really can't sing worth a damn. I've even adopted free-playing a bit, which helps with creativity.

Here's an example - I'd call this little interlude, Folk Piano
http://www.box.net/shared/j1mdbi474n

This one...free playing with a Blues/Jazz influence
http://www.box.net/shared/2e3hs0bvmk

This is my struggle with tunes such as Giant Steps, GBPPH, and Nefertiti which arose from a different era. For example, A Night in Tunisia makes just a bit more sense to me because I can easily sing the melody line as I improvise and attempt to stay close to the melody line. Some jazzers think that is too pedestrian and old-school and I can live with that.

But that does not prevent me from wanting to expand into jazz stylings from the 50s and 60s.

When it comes to scales, arpeggios, and ornamentations around the melody line, sometimes those come first, then I work on voicings and sometimes the opposite is true, where chords, substitute chords, broken chords, and voicings lead the way before expanding on a melody line.

Admittedly, much of this is intuitive. I studied modes only briefly.

As to whether or not to use which mode when, which pentatonic scale where, and which rootless chord or broken chord where or when kind of depends on what I perceive as the intention of the music and how I'd like it to sound based on the limits of my own experience (which is quite limited). Unfortunately, I don't think about it in detail. Yes, it's not very structured-driven - you can tell that by my playing.

I should really split my lessons between my most excellent classical piano teacher and start taking jazz lessons from a teacher who can help me get a better grip on bringing together what I want to accomplish as it pertains jazz. In the meantime, I will, however, continue to work on my biggest achilles heel, changes in time.

Giant Steps for me would be a GIANT STEP! Thanks for the suggestion - I'll give it a shot in the near future - such a tempo!

Crazy Giant Steps
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kotK9FNEYU

Sorry for the long post, which is irrelevant to the topic of Nefertiti. Now, back to your regularly scheduled program.

Glen