Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Jazz Study Group 2: Advanced Players

Obviously the harmony I use in the minor blues doesn't focus on the main chord tones. I deliberately avoid the b3 of the chord. I wanted to show this example because it is intentional what I do and whether you like it or not, I happen to like it. I just want to focus on groove, phrasing and time.

I'm very happy it sounds different. If anything, my weakest point is I'm unsure of myself so I can't highlight the idea with intent. And when I played it front of my teacher he said 'good' that I was focusing on the 9/13. It's part of this style and my voice.

It's funny that the more we debate this the more firm I am about my intent.

I wouldn't do this on ATTYA. Doesn't fit. Aside from Footprints though, I'll do it on Invitation, Stolen Moments, Mr. PC, parts of Solar, parts of Stella, 500 Miles High...etc.

Ever since I started doing this, I've been getting this extended "talks" about vocabulary. Surely guys like Alan Pasqua and Bill Cunliffe can hear what I'm doing. Given how strict Alan is with harmonic outlining that we would stop me if he didn't buy what I was outlining.

The reason he doesn't is because whatever I'm doing, someone else has done. I just looked at the transcription of Oliver Nelson's solo on Stolen Moments. He's outlining the same tones I am. 9/11/13. It's my vocabulary.

BTW - I just wanted to comment on Pilc. As often as I post that, what I'm really trying to say is that, I can't hear what he plays there. those intervals are really strange.

But when he does it with so much intent, particularly when he sings with it, I start to buy it. I think my weakness is LACK OF INTENT. I think motif repetition will help build intent.

If I'm not sure what I want to hear, the listener will not be sure either.

On my the re-upload of the Footprints recording, the only thing different was more intent, though I felt it more at the beginning and started fading later on.

Anyway it's my theory.

I'm back to being bothered by the swing on this one.

Knotty, that's because as it turns out, the Aebersold bass player plays behind the beat and I didn't adjust. It was a little unusual for me in a waltz because the iRealB plays on top and so does my real bass player. But I wasn't going to re-record it.

Listen to it. I couldn't even time my melody properly.

I wonder if the BIAB Bass Player behaves differently on a waltz? Perhaps Chris can answer me.

The standard Jazzwaltz is pretty much on the "one". The Realtrack is also on "one" in the A section then it does a horrendous walking in the B section. I fired it.

However, I added a 4/4 bassline against the 3/4 drums and it comes out pretty interesting.
http://www.box.com/s/jn0uimv11d4y8xbxdnpm

I couldn't resist the temptation to add a Rhodes and a sop sax solo.
http://www.box.com/s/xov3n3b0fcx1s6xul4ad

Melody doesn't come from harmony. The basis for harmony is melody. I'm not talking about taking a melodic or harmonic approach to constructing lines. I mean that harmony is created by layering melodies over the top of each other that move in complimentary, functional ways. This is going back to tonal function as it's understood in classical music, particularly from the common practice period. The kind of stuff that is done in four-voice choral writing. While harmony can be treated as an isolated vertical occurance, it needs to be understood as a fluid connection of simulataneous melodies that each have a different "pull" against each other. An understanding of how the melodies within the harmony are functioning should be reflected in a melodic line, whether it's classical, bebop, modal, intervalic, or whatever. Obviously varying amounts of liberty can be taken with how strong or weak this relationship is, but this should be deliberate.



I don't think the issue is about bebop or modern vocabulary. I don't think it's necessarily about jazz at all. It's just about what makes music fit together and sound good. Of course, this is ultimately subjective, but all good musicians know how to work within the boundaries of common accepted harmonic, melodic, and rhythmic relationships. This must be understood and absorbed before anything new of lasting value can be created. I think if a musician wants to bypass this tradition to do their own thing and believes that whatever they are doing sounds good, that's fine. But anyone who does this is always going to be seen as inferior by the best musicians.

That said, my teacher in undergrad, who was also a top-notch player, never tried to stop me from playing whatever I wanted. He didn't try to push any "vocabulary" on me or make me transcribe. We just worked on analyzing tunes for ways to voice the chords, what scales could work over the changes, etc. But I was stuck when I left there. It wasn't his fault, but I later realized that I was missing out on the fundamentals. My teacher was sharing with me his passion for music and guiding me to understand all kinds of advanced concepts. But the thing is, I didn't really understand them, because I couldn't use any of it effectively. I think that teachers sometimes just don't really know how to reach back far enough to help students understand things that are so fundamental. So they just show us what they know, and hope we'll fill in the gaps on our own. But if we don't know the gaps are there, obviously that probably won't happen.




It's just not possible for anything good to be void of any vocabulary. It doesn't have to be jazz vocabulary, but it has to come from some inherent understanding of fundamentals in music... not 9's and 13's, modes, triad pairs, altered scales, etc. Those things are definitely cool, but they don't work if you can't just play the basics first. It doesn't matter if you're composing, improvising, or arranging. If a melody is based on chord tones, it's based on an understanding of how those chord tones relate to each other melodically, from one chord to the next. And I'm talking about the fundamental chord tones... 1, 3, 5, and dominant 7's.

I think your teacher is really great, and plays some awesome stuff that's really advanced. But that might be why he's not telling you that you're missing the basics. Sometimes teachers just don't want to deal with that stuff, or they're used to teaching students who have already absorbed it so they don't really know how to teach it.

I know this is a hard pill to swallow, but I really just mean to help. I think it's really great how much you've learned and how passionate you are about jazz. And I know you would like to play with top-notch players some day. I would too! But I just don't think that's possible without being able to communicate in their language, which although advanced, is steeped in the basics.

The advanced stuff isn't going anywhere. It'll be there when you're ready, and it'll be much easier if you have mastered the basics first.

The stuff that Pilc plays that sounds strange to you isn't strange to him at all. That's how he can play it with intent. But it isn't familiar to him because he has become accustomed to the sound of something "outside". It's because he understands it and hears it in relation to the fundamental underlying harmonic/melodic relationships, or even more specifically, the key center at the time. The underlying more stable stuff is so strong in his ear that he is pulled towards it even when he gets far away and even stays far away for awhile. But at some point or points, there is always a return to the basics... the foundation that supports the "outside" stuff.

So I think you're right that you're missing intent. But I don't think you can get that intent without having basic intent first.

I'm curious... how's you're relative pitch? Have you ever tried Bruce Arnold's One Note Ear Training?

Here's the advanced level from the complete method. I'll only leave this up until you've tried it. You should be able to do this with no problem at all if you have the basics in your ear. Here's how it works... a chord progression is played to set your ear in the key of C, then it's followed by a random note for you to identify, and quickly (it's the advanced level!) followed with the answer. The ability to do this comes from having a firm grasp on the gravity of a key center and how notes "feel" against it. It's not based on intervals like many traditional ear training methods. That doesn't work.

http://www.box.com/s/2lnvayu5gb4yt63h5lhn

When I started doing this a few years ago, I worked with the basic level, which is the same stuff, just alot slower to give you time to absorb it more. I was about 50% on it then. Now I can do the advanced level at about 99%, mind wanders sometimes . I'm also now working with his "Key-Note Recognition" method. This one moves the key center around playing progressions in different keys, but always following the progression with a middle C. So here you have to be able to tell what the middle C is in each new key center.

Extended talks about vocabulary from me will now, and forever more, be directed towards others, JW. You obviously have a firm belief in what you are doing, so carry on. Post more recordings when you want to share your progress.

>>as it turns out, the Aebersold bass player plays behind the beat
Something for me to learn here. Where's the beat?

Is this from Vol 54 - Tyrone Wheeler?

Knotty, you can hear the hi-hat.

Chris, it's frustrating with Jazz Waltzes. There is never a good option.

Can you layer a 2/4 rhythm on top?

The Aebersold is definitely better. I just caught off guard as that was the first time I played with that track.

Vol 54 Maiden Voyage

On a completely different note, my favorite jazz website, Marc Meyer's Jazzwax, is currently running a terrific 5 part interview with Rudy Van Gelder. He's putting up a new part each day. If you want to read it, I recommend scrolling down and reading part I and then part II so you get the flow.

Scott and Scep, I wish this talk was really about vocabulary. But it's not.

I just transcribed KJ on BBBB recently. I even played with the record. There's nothing he's doing that doesn't follow my understanding of vocabulary. His twists, turns and chromatic movements are decidedly bebop (at least the portions I transcribed).

So this isn't really about that. It's because I have chosen to follow my ears that you've heard something different sounding. And somehow to you, it obliterates everything I already knew.

For 3 years with Pasqua, I had played nothing but "Chord tones on downbeats". Very strict. He had perfect pitch. He would remember every phrase I did and all the 'wrong notes'. That's how we started.

The last 2 we did more of this stuff I'm doing here. He is a modern jazz player after all. So there it is. Let's not assume I'm not doing it deliberately or I don't understand the basis.

My harmonic understanding is changing and it's affecting what my view of things. And that also affects my note choices. How it translates has to develop further but I've allowed it now to come out. It is advanced and it requires more work. But that's where it is. You will hear more of it on some types of tunes.

Hmm that would mean having Dixieland style . . . no have.
Here's another rendition, slighy better.
http://www.box.com/s/9n84si5yroi7ag4iogx7

As a trio - pno solo:
http://www.box.com/s/codgabgdx0z9xa3rb0bo

Very cool tip, thanks

Do you hear the piano? The machine is comping in dotted quarters which I would expect in Waltz. So when the bass is not walking I would expect dotted quarters too. We were trying to fake iRealB to do that by putting 2/4 on it. But the drums has to stick to 3/4.

iRealB does switch to dotted quarters but it's random. I would have expected it to do it for 'x' bars of a style so it's more realistic.

Noticed too that the machine soloing is heck bent on a traditional approach with the harmony. LOL. After all this discussion...

The solo style is based on Vancouver based Miles Black's playing.
http://www.milesblack.com

All you have to do is post recordings, JW. From there you can glean whatever support or advice, or whatever it is you may be looking for by doing so. Debate about note choices should never enter the conversation if what people hear sounds good. Period. The idea about sharing recordings was to grow, no?


The thing is, you've not yet shown that you've known those things you say you knew, otherwise they'd be present in your current recordings, no? One doesn't need to be a pro player to demonstrate understanding of making music.

Yes, I clearly remember that, and how adamant you were at that time that nothing else was really valid. I believe you're doing the same now, but in reverse. Somehow you're saying that all the earlier lessons are not valid, or at least not worth playing because it is somehow of less importance than exploring new territories.

I'm not assuming anything. All I can do is respond to what I hear. Perhaps your teachers have a better chance to hear what you are doing because you spend an hour with them, and there is a chance to have a dialogue about your intent and direction. However, that still doesn't equate to me agreeing with them. Kind of like me trying to convince you how great looking I am, but posting a somewhat less than pretty picture of myself.


Advanced understanding is fine. I hope you don't believe you're the first person to arrive there and that nobody else here can have any idea about where this place is. As well, like I've said by PM in the past, any advanced playing should be self-evident, not needing explanation.

I don't care to argue with you JW, but like Scott, I guess the teacher in me wants to at least ensure that you've been told that you may be missing some important stuff, despite what your current teachers are telling you.

And as I've also said, discussing these things is far less effective than posting recordings of the ideas at hand.

Well, there's "endless" possibilites, I could generate two files: one with the comp, the other with a solo based on reharms. Everything is editable. The files I've been uploading take approx 10 mins to do.