[QUOTE=boog3ee]Basically its 4/4. another good example is The Simpsons opening soundtrack...[/QUOTE]


okay, thanks.

California Uber Alles is another good example of that rythym.

Using intervals in improvisation
 

I don't know how to work with intervals in my improvisation, could someone help me? I know intervals but I want to know which intervals play on different keys and on chord progressions.

Thanks

mike

[QUOTE=boog3ee]Basically its 4/4. another good example is The Simpsons opening soundtrack...[/QUOTE]
It might be written in 8/8, though, since that's really what it is. It's pulse is in eighth notes. I've seen it written before as 3+3+2/8.

That is the Pulse of the beat, thats why I said its "technically" 4/4 which is almost identical...

[QUOTE=boog3ee]That is the Pulse of the beat, thats why I said its "technically" 4/4 which is almost identical...[/QUOTE]
Remember time signatures aren't fractions. 6/8 feel bears no resemblance to 3/4. In fact, its more similar to 2/4.

[QUOTE=mikeeee]I don't know how to work with intervals in my improvisation, could someone help me? I know intervals but I want to know which intervals play on different keys and on chord progressions.

Thanks

mike[/QUOTE]
This is where working your ear as well as your knowledge of intervals comes in to play
I'm not sure what you mean by in different keys as the intervals go from unison to being it's octave unless you are going towards extending higher ie:( major 9th etc... )
Depending on the key in which you are in you can use any of the twelve intervals in your favour like the old saying goes their are no wrong notes only wrong resolutions
But the key is getting your ear and finger relationship working so you can play what you hear in your head which is the foundation of soloing

Any jazz drummers in the house? :wave:

hey i have been thoroughly confused with modes for some time now. i don't understand the purpose of modes if they are just the same scale in different starting positions thanks for any help.

[QUOTE=isaluteu]hey i have been thoroughly confused with modes for some time now. i don't understand the purpose of modes if they are just the same scale in different starting positions thanks for any help.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I've never gotten that either. I mean, I know how to play them, but I don't know a whole lot of theory, so, hopefully someone can answer the question.

Alright, I can give you guys the breakdown on modes. Every key is composed of modes. The key of E major (which you should know) is made of the chords E major, F# minor, G#minor, A major, B major, C#minor, D#minor (flat fifth) and repeats itself from there. Each chord of the key represents a particular mode. The modes are as follows:
1-Ionian
2-Dorian
3-Phrygian
4-Lydian
5-Mixolydian
6-Phyagrian
7-Locrine

So, If you are playing a song in the key of E and the chord progression is E, G#minor, A, F#minor, then when you are soloing you would use the Ionian scale for the first part, the phrygian scale for the second part, the mixolydian scale for the third part, and the dorian scale for the fourth part. that's a loose breakdown, and please correct me if I am wrong.

Actually, you'd use the lydian scale for the third part (the A chord), but that doesn't answer their questions entirely.

The importance of modes is twofold. One, it simplifies playing over changes. It's easier to see Em7 and think "Dorian" than it is to see an Em7 and think "Em7 is the II chord of D major, so I'll play D major." Also, in jazz moreso than in rock or other genres, the chords are seperate from one another, even if they are in the same family. It sounds better over a II-V-I to [i]play[/i] the II chord, the V chord, and the I chord, instead of just playing a solo in the key of the I chord. It creates more of a sense of tension and resolution.

However, if you really wanted to, you could think this way, except for one small but important fact. The major scale contains "avoid" notes (bad term) which may work over some chords but not others that are part of the same family of scales. For instance, if you hold an F against a Cmaj7 chord, you should notice some disonance. [I can't tell you why (and neither can most people), but it has to do with the other tones that are present in the c note.] But an F sounds fine over a Dm7, or over a G7. And a C does not sound good over a G7. To see this more clearly, playing with modes will help.

To add one more point, there are no avoid notes in the melodic minor scale. It is possible to play the melodic minor scale over any of the chords that appear in melodic minor harmony.

I hope that gives you enough of a reason to learn your modes. While it is not essential, it is very helpful and will make things much clearer.

[QUOTE=spastic]Actually, you'd use the lydian scale for the third part (the A chord), but that doesn't answer their questions entirely.

The importance of modes is twofold. One, it simplifies playing over changes. It's easier to see Em7 and think "Dorian" than it is to see an Em7 and think "Em7 is the II chord of D major, so I'll play D major." Also, in jazz moreso than in rock or other genres, the chords are seperate from one another, even if they are in the same family. It sounds better over a II-V-I to [i]play[/i] the II chord, the V chord, and the I chord, instead of just playing a solo in the key of the I chord. It creates more of a sense of tension and resolution.

However, if you really wanted to, you could think this way, except for one small but important fact. The major scale contains "avoid" notes (bad term) which may work over some chords but not others that are part of the same family of scales. For instance, if you hold an F against a Cmaj7 chord, you should notice some disonance. [I can't tell you why (and neither can most people), but it has to do with the other tones that are present in the c note.] But an F sounds fine over a Dm7, or over a G7. And a C does not sound good over a G7. To see this more clearly, playing with modes will help.

To add one more point, there are no avoid notes in the melodic minor scale. It is possible to play the melodic minor scale over any of the chords that appear in melodic minor harmony.

I hope that gives you enough of a reason to learn your modes. While it is not essential, it is very helpful and will make things much clearer.[/QUOTE]


The way I see it, playing an F over a Cmaj7 chord creates a Cmaj7add11.

That means there's a minor second (or a minor ninth) interval between the E and the F, and a tritone interval between the B and the F.

It's the same chord as a G13(no5)/C, so it's not surprising that when you create [i]that[/i] chord out of what's supposed to be the I chord in a progression, it won't sound too great.

No, the F does not sound good (and I use the word good very loosely here) over a Cmaj7 chord. Most if not all musicians proficient in music theory will agree with me.

Mark Levine, the author of "The Jazz Theory Book", described it to me (as best as he could remember; he hadn't taken this course since college). Needless to say, if he didn't really remember then I certainly cannot explain it well at all, but I will give you the basic outline. As you probably know, within every note, there are a series of overtones (if you play a note really low, you can here them better). The overtones that come out the most strongly are the root, the second, the third, the perfect fifth, and the sixth. For whatever reason, when you combine the 4th with these notes, it sounds bad.

Now, I don't think it's necessary to know why it sounds bad, but nevertheless, that tone does sound dissonant over a major chord. If you lower it an octave it sounds alright, and if you only use it as a passing tone it sounds alright, but if you hold an F against a Cmaj chord, it sounds dissonant.

Agreed. I try to avoid the perfect fourth like the plague except as a passing tone in my soloing. It sounds too much like the chord is moving away from itself before the chord actually changes.

[QUOTE=spastic]No, the F does not sound good (and I use the word good very loosely here) over a Cmaj7 chord. Most if not all musicians proficient in music theory will agree with me.

Mark Levine, the author of "The Jazz Theory Book", described it to me (as best as he could remember; he hadn't taken this course since college). Needless to say, if he didn't really remember then I certainly cannot explain it well at all, but I will give you the basic outline. As you probably know, within every note, there are a series of overtones (if you play a note really low, you can here them better). The overtones that come out the most strongly are the root, the second, the third, the perfect fifth, and the sixth. For whatever reason, when you combine the 4th with these notes, it sounds bad.

Now, I don't think it's necessary to know why it sounds bad, but nevertheless, that tone does sound dissonant over a major chord. If you lower it an octave it sounds alright, and if you only use it as a passing tone it sounds alright, but if you hold an F against a Cmaj chord, it sounds dissonant.[/QUOTE]


I know it doesn't sound good.

I was just saying, perhaps the fact that the perfect fourth and the major seventh are a tritone apart has something to do with that. Like, if you play an F over a Cmaj7, it makes the B resolve to a C, and the F resolve to an E, same as any chord with that tritone in it.

[QUOTE=Silvermedalmafia]
1-Ionian
2-Dorian
3-Phrygian
4-Lydian
5-Mixolydian
6-Phyagrian
7-Locrine
[/QUOTE]

6 - Aeolian (natural minor)
7 - Locrian

[QUOTE=HaVIC5]Agreed. I try to avoid the perfect fourth like the plague except as a passing tone in my soloing. It sounds too much like the chord is moving away from itself before the chord actually changes.[/QUOTE]

exactly, lingering on the fourth implies a chord change to the listener. if the change doesnt happen it sounds confusing. at least thats my take on that.

but i have a question:

i heard one of my music teachers say that there are like 17 different rythmic patterns in the rythem alphabet (if you will). what are these 17 patterns? usually i deal with any sight-reading stuff as i see it but i think it would be really helpful to just memorize it.

i dont know about 17 but i have a book that does 42 i believe. it starts with 4/4 and does 7 attacks per measure every possible way then it goes to 6 attacks. then it does 3/4 and so on. its a really good book if you have trouble with reading rythms like dotted notes and such. its called melodic rythms for guitar but you could use it for any instrument. its a berklee press book.

[QUOTE=xhaereticusx]i dont know about 17 but i have a book that does 42 i believe. it starts with 4/4 and does 7 attacks per measure every possible way then it goes to 6 attacks. then it does 3/4 and so on. its a really good book if you have trouble with reading rythms like dotted notes and such. its called melodic rythms for guitar but you could use it for any instrument. its a berklee press book.[/QUOTE]

awesome, i may just pick that up. thanks.

Here's a thought
Which method do you like about your approaching to soloing in a jazz context

a) Blanket scale approach - By finding the key or basic tonality and playing a single scale to cover the entirety of the area
b) Chordal/scalular approach - By playing the appropriate scale/chord for each chord within each bar
c) Outside playing - By simply playing passing notes or notes outside the key signature to create tension

I've found out that the blanket scale approach is more melodic in terms of spacing and the chordal/scalular method tends to be failsafe in other words all the right notes played within that chord ( continous scale ) and playing out gives you tension provided you resolve it
But playing a combination as well as a bit of technique gives you clarity of building up your solo's as well as being melodic and being structured at the same time
Just something to think about anyway your thought's on the matter?

[QUOTE=Jace The Bass]Here's a thought
Which method do you like about your approaching to soloing in a jazz context

a) Blanket scale approach - By finding the key or basic tonality and playing a single scale to cover the entirety of the area
b) Chordal/scalular approach - By playing the appropriate scale/chord for each chord within each bar
c) Outside playing - By simply playing passing notes or notes outside the key signature to create tension

I've found out that the blanket scale approach is more melodic in terms of spacing and the chordal/scalular method tends to be failsafe in other words all the right notes played within that chord ( continous scale ) and playing out gives you tension provided you resolve it
But playing a combination as well as a bit of technique gives you clarity of building up your solo's as well as being melodic and being structured at the same time
Just something to think about anyway your thought's on the matter?[/QUOTE]


I myself generally go with the blanket method for about 75% of the time, but usually with a lot of passing tones and chromaticism thrown in the mix. The other 25 is usually by taking a chord tone with chromatics approach.

[QUOTE=Jace The Bass]Here's a thought
Which method do you like about your approaching to soloing in a jazz context

a) Blanket scale approach - By finding the key or basic tonality and playing a single scale to cover the entirety of the area
b) Chordal/scalular approach - By playing the appropriate scale/chord for each chord within each bar
c) Outside playing - By simply playing passing notes or notes outside the key signature to create tension

I've found out that the blanket scale approach is more melodic in terms of spacing and the chordal/scalular method tends to be failsafe in other words all the right notes played within that chord ( continous scale ) and playing out gives you tension provided you resolve it
But playing a combination as well as a bit of technique gives you clarity of building up your solo's as well as being melodic and being structured at the same time
Just something to think about anyway your thought's on the matter?[/QUOTE]

I solo "outside" (Thelonius Monk) when possible, like when I'm playing with a combo. When with the big band, I just follow the changes, which are most of the time simple blues.

The blanket scale approach is ok, but seems to lack something for me. I always try to play around each chord, and always add passing and chromatic notes, even if I am (rarely) using the blanket scale approach.

I think you should be able to hear the chord progression in a solo (not always, but as a general rule), but it should still have direction and good melodic ideas. The blanket scale approach covers the latter but not the former.

Good point spastic
I think I use the blanket scale approach when theirs like too many chords in one bar or the tempo is at a ridiculous speed esp. Cherokee dam those horn players they just love uptempo stuff but you are right you should be able to hear the chord progression in a solo

Well yeah I'll use the blanket scale approach when I have to, but I don't like it. For example, I use it in Giant Steps and Countdown, but it would sound so much better if I could hit all of those chords.

But I can't. Not yet anyways. :-p

here is an easy one: do "sus 2" and "sus 4" chords include the thirds? im almost positive they dont, but someone was trying to tell me they do.

hey
 

Hey, I am new to this message board and I have a fair amount of knowledge dealing with music theory so if any one wants help I'd be glad to help out :naughty:

[QUOTE=jazzfunkboy]here is an easy one: do "sus 2" and "sus 4" chords include the thirds? im almost positive they dont, but someone was trying to tell me they do.[/QUOTE]


No they do not, hence the title of 'sus' (any sus chord does not have a third).

Here's a question "How do you free yourself from reading Lead sheets ? " Do you use the Roman numerial system ( II-V-iiv...etc ) or do you analyse the key and use your ears or do you theorically group it in sections ( ie: find two fives or figure out repeated patterns of the form ) any of you guys got any other method you like to share?