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

I can clearly hear Evans outline exactly the harmony of the chords in the Real Book. I don't hear any alterations like C/Bb instead of Bb7 (I don't hear him every playing an E there) for example. Or complicating an EbMaj7 chord into A7Alt/Eb, which is like saying Eb7/Eb. Did he really turn that into a dominant? I hear a Maj7 there. He practically arpeggiates the chords and in fact does so.

The only thing different from the Real book is the Ab7 ( in |CMaj7| Bb7 | EbMa7 | Ab7 |). The melody dictates that that be Ab7(b9). During the head, I play that as Ab7(#5)(b9) but during the solo, Klink already noted that he plays it as a simple Ab7 and I do the same.

This is Evans here so he's playing 'regular' rootless voicings like Bb7(9)(13). Does that have to be stated in a Real book? Unless there's an alteration, I assume we all just naturally use those.

But this is an Evans Trio here. And I think it's a mistake to assume that Scott LaFaro would be playing the root during the solo. He does during the head though. So, given my understanding of Evans here, following the bass player isn't necessarily accurate. In the past, I have assumed that the bass player would play the root on Beat 1 (as told to me by an early teacher) and it is true in most cases. But I've been corrected by my current teacher on this as there are some that won't. And in an Evans Trio, the bass player is soloing over the changes too, not just outlining 1/3/5/7.

This is jazz though and I would think that everyone would agree that all dominants are fair game for alterations. So if you play C/Bb instead of Bb7, there's nothing wrong with that ( turned into Bb7(11)(13) ). So if you changed the chords to what you say, you would sound unique in playing VE. Nothing wrong with that.

However, to assert that I played the wrong chords doesn't match what I hear. Just tell me where in Moonbeams does Evans play your alterations. Just stick with the Head here so we can all listen. I think I play the head using the same chords, except for a purposeful modification of the last chord at the ending.

Your chords sound like an interesting reharm and it should come out great if you play it like that. But to my ears, it is a reharm. Like I said, if you want to debate that, just refer to the head and let's bring it on.

Hey guys, I didn't realize this thread existed. It sounds like you guys are doing some serious discussion and playing and stuff. I guess I'll share some of my stuff too.. this is from recent performance I did. A friend of mine is going away for college and he asked to play with him at his going away party.

Maiden Voyage in 7
http://www.divshare.com/download/11329367-68a


I guess lately I am feeling a lot of disconnect with my playing..like I am playing all these stuff but not sure how to make music out of it. It makes me wonder about all these great players like John Taylor, Keith Jarrett, Kenny Barron, and how they can play something that is so musical, and how everything just seems to be at the right place. Any suggestions would be welcome

He often plays lines that contradict the voicings in the left hand but I haven't listened to them all that much. I think his left hand sometimes gets too loud and busy. What I did notice is that he sometimes plays the II chord in front of the dominants and his lines also follow this.

Klink, are you referring to me or Etcetera? If you're talking about Evans, he's doing rhythmic displacement. But you already know that. In fact, in practice, I do it too in VE (although, didn't do it when I recorded.)

When I do my chord tone listening, I'm thinking of the displacement and how many beats ahead he's outlining the chord. Since Evans is known for this, luckily, we can expect it. My teacher had to alert me to it though.

For example, I've been practicing chord anticipation in VE on the D, and the Bmaj7 transition points, meaning, I'm hoping to play those chord tones for several beats while still in the prior chord (Bb7 and G7 respectively). I thought this was as good a tune as any to do that.

.

Nice playing Etcetra, I love standards in different timings, but I never tried Maiden voyage like this.

When I get that disconnect you are talking about I always do a lot of free improvisation. Often I have found that when I work to much on technical stuff I think far too much about what I should be playing rather than letting it just come out by itself, and free impro helps me with that.
And everything Dave said is spot on.
Welcome to the thread as well.

That bass line in 7 reminded me of a great Django Bates tune called 'and a golden pear'

I can't find it on youtube so here is a different one from the same album, it's in 15/8 in the main solo section although its not easy to follow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYXiA9HxYuA

yea still talking about very early in response to scepticalF.

Actually, the only bass note I couldn't clearly understand was the one I mentioned. What I am arguing for is LISTENING to understand the song. Why argue the same point as me? You either agree or disagree. As for the changes, no, they are not so far out, and in fact are much closer (I believe) to what Evans intended. In any case, I'm not saying my changes are the definitive ones, but that they make more sense than just a bunch of 7 chords that don't really relate to each other.


Also, looking back on what I wrote, there may be one or two chords that aren't portrayed exactly like they should be, but nevertheless the upper structure movement outlined by the root note is the same.

And finally, why be insulting? It's tiring, and incredibly counterproductive to learning.

Sort of, but not quite. I want to find what the original intention was. I also believe this can't be found by reading it out of a book. Believe me, I have most if not all of the legit and not so legit fake books, and 'learned' most of my jazz repetoire from them, and I can say without doubt that the only tunes that I really understand are the ones I've spent time listening to to figure out why the changes are the way they are.

Perhaps I can now go back to the books and use them in a different way, who knows?

And again, exactly opposite of my intentions. To understand the soul of the piece and composer is my intention. How does reading the piece allow me to do that? You yourself suggested that the ears are more important than the eyes. So how do you explain yourself in this context?

Ok, so let's talk about rhythmic displacement for a second. Say one does not use the term (and theoretical understanding) of rhythmic displacement to understand what has transpired in any given bar or phrase. What are you left with? Upper structures, no? A Bb7 chord in the bass with a Dmaj triad on top suggests to me an upperstructure, whether or not something was anticipated by two beats or not. The anticipation in any case is used to balance the overall line and to perhaps give more cohesion to chords that may be seemingly a bit disconnected.

...and why is it that no one could either try the changes or ignore the post? The responses for the most part were in defense of something (reading?), but did little to understand what I was actually suggesting.

To put this back in a proper perspective, and to perhaps explain myself better let me say this: When people talk about how difficult a piece is because of the seemingly disconnected chord changes, and how hard it is to memorize a piece because of this, and how mistakes happen whenever they try to record it (all of which happen to anyone when learning a piece, of course), then why not try a different perspective. Why argue with someone that is having success with their methods, especially when you may be having less success? I'm not here to say that everyone is wrong in their approach to learning songs, but I also have a very hard time saying to the same people that they should just try harder doing the same stuff.

I think it's time I posted a few versions of what I'm doing with VE. Let's see if the red dot syndrome kills my ideas...

Scep, I'm a little unclear if Klink was commenting on what I said or was referring to you.

In response to your question, from my little Jazz history, I learned that this rhythmic displacement thing started with Bud Powell (who was also an influence to Evans). From an effect point of view, it seems that it was not intended to create upperstructures. Instead, it sounds like you're going 'outside' for a couple of beats.

So to me this is a tension/release thing. From the examples I've seen of this, it's just playing the next chord or the prior chord. So I can't imagine any other mystic purpose. Otherwise, why not play some other unconnected shape?

Interesting BTW that I've seen Chick and Evans use this. Both were highly influenced by Powell.

I was very specific with you. I tried some of it.

Thanks so much for the advice!!

Dave-you are so right, I've been doing a lot since last year .. I made a list of things I've transcribed&learned on the instrument, and I didn't realize just how much I did... I must have done like over 50 solos/tunes, and learned like 20 of them on my instrument. Maybe I am feeling burned out. As far as the bass line is concerned.. I guess he wasn't very confident about playing in 7 so he just stuck with the line. But you are right, it would be nice if he could stretch out more. and did other things when I was doing some over-the-barline stuff..that would be the next challenge I suppose.

And I agree with you that at one point you are pretty much on your own. There is no teacher breathing down at you neck telling you to transcribe so you pretty much have to figure things out by yourself. But I do think being in the right enviroment helps. I loved LA when I was in school because there were so many great players.. and I'd like to go back or go somewhere more challenging in the near future.

Beeboss

Yea free improv sounds like a great idea. I was actually thinking of getting my friends together and do a free-improv session. I think it will help me play without expectation, which is important... after all I think I've built a lot of expectation about my playing after all the stuff I've worked on... and free improv will give me a context where I can just throw away everything I learned and look at music in a different way than I have been lately. It'll also give me an oppertunity to just play less, which is really really difficult for me.

I think what Dave said is spot on, I learned a lot of new stuff and I guess I still haven't found a way to put all those new elements together yet.. Maybe i should just relax, and let the come to me rather than trying to force it all out at one time. I didn't practice for the last two 2 days.. it was the first time I didn't practice at all in 2 years!! maybe I should go enjoy life before I am pulled practicing again

btw here's a solo version of Maiden Voyage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en4qXENGNdc

Huh? Explain what? I said theory should be secondary to the song itself. Therefore you need to use your ears to listen and hear what is going on. I am not contradicting myself at all. I think you misread what I wrote.

You say you want to understand the soul but just list off a bunch of chord changes as if that is the be all to the composer's intention. You don't say anything at all about the actual music. What's the mood and feeling you get when you hear the song. Maybe try emulating that more instead of worrying about whether you got the right changes.

Nobody listen to jazz is going, "oh, he missed the F altered chord there, that change was off, so he totally messed up!"

If you ever listened to Herbie Hancock play Dolphin Dance, he does so many arrangements that sometimes it doesn't sound like the same song. I've heard free improvs where he barely outlines the melody, and other times like on the original record. Some slow versions on solo piano like a ballad and others riveting fast.

Even he said on McPartland's show after he played it that it comes out different every time.

So chords could be changed, melody notes, moods, tempo.

I think you need to ask yourself why you play jazz. What gives you enjoyment to the music. Are you having fun.

The answers to that will point you in the right direction more than any fake book will.

You're right. I missed putting in the B before the G. I also wasn't talking about a root movement, in any case, I was talking about the roots of the upper structures. And now that I'm on the topic, there are about another 20 chords that the real book probably misses because it only supplies one chord per bar. In the B section in particular the there are so many connecting chords that Evans plays that aren't part of the real book chords.

There is no mystic purpose. I don't think I alluded to one did I? All I'm suggesting is that it is sometimes easier, for me at least, to look at possible upperstructure chords that will result from the rhythmic displacement. I really don't care what people call these things, but I do like the ideas that spring from them, and those ideas to me suggest richer chords.