I just wonder if you enjoy watching the trail of destruction you began? You have deliberately sewn the seeds of discontent and at every opportunity inflamed the situation as you encouraged turning one member against another. Not once did you so much as utter a word which may serve to calm the waters. And after ten pages, what have you achieved? Has anybodys knowledge been enriched? You have merely degraded the level of discourse to a point where the entire site becomes contaminated. Musical enlightenment should be our collective aim. To guide each other. You have done exactly the opposite. Do you see that? Are you even aware of it?

 

To whom might be interested.

I don't want to be right, and I don't care to be, at all. I'm just on a personal pursue and, from what I can tell, a never ending one.

I've started this thread from what I consider being the 12 TET diatonic territory, or the way I may grasp it so far, which from I'm able to extract all the musical ideas I've ever came across, in an organized fashion, thus these 6 scales.

That didn't happened overnight, as so as I haven't disregarded the major common sense literature, nor practical applications to reach it out, as some may presume.

Therefore, it's not music-genre specific, let alone a kind of scale-wisdom-conquering perspective; again, it is a pragmatic organizational approach.

If that offends someone or somehow disecrate their beliefs, please, just ignore it. I wholeheartedly apologize and lament if such content stirs that kind of feelling within oneself.

 

Haters gonna hate but,
here's my analysis of "Intutil Paisagem" by Jobim..

I don't claim this to be the only possible way of approaching it, or the most correct/orthodox,
this track modulates constantly and in different ways, so there could be more/less practical alternative approaches,
but this is how I see it..

Bar 1 Amaj7 = A Major/Lydian
Bar 2 Abmaj7 = Ab Major/Lydian
Bar 3 Gmaj7 = G Major/Lydian (I will probably use Lydians all the way)
Bar 4 F#7 = F# Mixolydian b6 (melody implies D nat, which is the b6)

That's Chromatic Modulation, three times in a row, then..

Bar 5-6 Bm7 = B Dorian (4th of F#, 2 notes difference from F# Mixo)
you could later change it for another minor scale, for instance Romanian/Dorian #4, or use that b5 as the Blues note..

Bar 7 Dm/Dm6 = D Dorian/Melodic Minor (minor third up Modulation, strong effect, Dorian/Mel Min would be a good choice
as they include the nat6)
Bar 8 DmMaj7/Dm6 = D Melodic Minor

Bar 9 C#7(13)/C#7(#5) = C# Mixolydian > C# Mixolydian b6 (tasty chromatic Modulation from D)

Bar 10 F#9 = F# Lydian Dom, (4rth of C#, melody has a B# implying Lydian Dom, then the b9 alteration comes, leading to..)
Bar 11 B7 = B Mixolydian (or b6 if you want to preserve the b9 of the previous bar) (4rth of F#, however melody has a b3 which implies Bebop Scale or even Dorian making it more bluesy )
Bar 12 E7 = E Mixolydian 4th of B, (only nat3 of B changes to b3, which is the b7 of E, kinda bluesy)
Bar 13 A7 = A Mixolydian (same stuff, continuing the 4rths cycle..)
Bar 14 D7 = D Mixolydian (idem, instead of Mixolydian/Bebop Scales you could approach the whole 4rths cycle with Chord Tones/Arpeggios)

Bar 15 Amaj7 = A Major/Lydian, 5th of D, IV-I backwards plagal cadence modulates to original tonality
Bar 16 Bb7b5 = Bb Lydian Dominant (Tritone sub of E, but also works as a Chromatic Modulation in this Context..

The progression then Rrepeats itself and starts with the Chromatic Modulations of the beggining,
so from Bar 15 to Bar 4 you got Five Chromatic Modulations side by side..

If that isn't a declaration of intention by Jobim, I don't know what is..
Remember Jobim was also into Orchestral music and his approach to Jazz reflects it.

 

Last edited: Jun 21, 2021

And here's another very Different example of Chromatic Modulation,
Armando's Rumba by Chick Corea, a track I love to play..

First part - Cm - D7 - G7 - Cm, X2 then..
--> C7 - Fm7 - F#7b5 - Gm7 - Abº - Aº - Bsus4-9 - B7 - Eb69

Cm = C Eolian or Dorian (or Romanian/Dorian #4)
D7 = D Phrygian Dom (which kinda turns the first Bar into Romanian/Dorian #4)
G7 = 4th of D or 5th of C, borrows a 7th chord to make the cadence more "perfect/authentic",
you could try to enhance the G7 by playing C Harmonic Minor
Cm = 4th of G, back to the tonal center..

C7 or C7b9 = C Mixolydian, HW Diminished or Phryigian Dom//Bebop Scale with the C7b9
Fm7 = F Dorian, 4rth of C
F#7b5 = F# Whole tone, Tritone Sub of C, but also Chromatic Modulation
Gm7 = G Dorian, Tritone Sub of C#, but also Chromatic Modulation
Abº = Ab HW Diminished, Tritone Sub of D, but also Chromatic Modulation
Aº = A WH Diminished, Tritone Sub of D#, but also Chromatic Modulation
Bbsus4-9 = Bb Mixolydian (Diatonic to C Eolian), Tritone Sub of E, but also Chromatic Modulation
Bb7 = Bb Mixolydian stays..
Eb69 = Bb Mixolydian/Eb Major, Diatonic nothing changes, 4th of Bb

And then ofc, Bass line goes -> E F F# G7#5...

Why I call it Chromatic?
Because it moves chromatically, ascending in this case.

Why I call it Modulation?
Because the over/underlining Harmony is Changed throughout, not Preserved..
Therefore since every chord brings a new Tonal Center with a new Harmony around it,
I call it Chromatic Modulation.

Again there could be better more Practical or Orthodox approaches,
it's certainly a very Tricky track, and improvising something properly Defined which works as a Melody,
while also Enhancing the underlining Harmony it's not Easy to say the least..

I'm personally a Guitarist, but I find it easier to improv on Piano, go figure..

And also I found concert Flute players for some reason tend to like this one,
and come up with very nice/defined/interesting ideas..

It would be interesting if those in the Know could chime in,
and share with us their approach/view or improv strategy on this one..

 

Last edited: Jul 4, 2021

A great deal of better pianists neither state the tonic or the perf fifth when comping for a seasoned improviser. This leaves the improviser a lot of space as the bassist is stating the tonic most of the time.. I played Armando's rhumba in an outfit 20 years ago and yes, it's great to play. 'Got a match' is another and 'Humpty dumpty' from Mad Hatter LP is an even bigger challenge than any of the tunes so far.
"Intutil Paisagem" I have always known to be in Bb, not A. A lot of improvisers justifiably see the 4th bar as a mII/V going to Cm or Bm in your chart.
There are some good flamenco versions of Armandos Rhumba out there and many ignore the D7 and G7 in their full form if they are creating fragmenting melodies, or use tritone subs and alterations on both dominants - so they treat the G7 like a G7#5. Corea even did this.
Most of the time they are developing a line and will use key tones from a chord that fit with what they are creating.
The important thing I notice in every great solo is a series of patterns, or melodies that while certainly on analysis can be attributed to specific scales, they probably were not thinking "Oh I'll just play a Lydian Dominant scale on this dom7b5 chord" at all. In fact, most of the great players I have come across have said as much. Parker said it, learn your scales and forget them. If a musician has and has played them for three decades they do not have to think about them and can get on with just playing music. The greatest solos in the world were not created by pre-thought. They were spontaneous.

 

One of the most useful strategies for anyone is to transcribe the original solo if analysis is their goal. The author is telling you what to do. This has been institutionalised in Parker, Trane, Corea, Hancock, Jarrett, Metheny and pretty much every renowned improviser in the last 100 years.

 

Interesting I will check them out..

Also interesting, I'm not really into Secondary Dominants,
so I missed this point of view.. I will think about it.

I completely understand what you mean,
and the lines also blur to me when I play this track, because I have it quite internalized..
(I must have played it a million times probably.. lol)

But yeah, I'm trying to communicate a point of view/Analysis here,
so it's necessary to try to put a Name to things to convey the information..

Every musician thinks a bit differently tho,
and knowing how he/she will see, or label the stuff, also makes it very interesting to me.

 

It is truly depended on what I preceded. It depends on who is supporting your improvisation. If they state the fifth and the tonic, you will have less freedom.

try singing your solos without your instrument in your hand or a chart - Brecker had no chords on 'Three Quartets' in his solos . It does not matter how well you sing. It's not about pitching if you are hearing in your head correctly. People keep forgetting their instrument is voice without vowel sounds . So the phrasing, melodic movement and fragmentation become more important. It removes many constraints after a while of doing this when you pick up your horn/instrument again because you hear it in your head while knowing instead of only one (seeing).

 

Ah "Got a Match" yes.. nice one!

I recall hearing it a few times before,
but certainly not the Elektrik Band version..

For some reason I want to say it was with Bela Fleck on the Banjo,
so maybe it's on a Fleck disc, or in one of the two discs Corea & Fleck made together..


Humpty Dumpty is serious angular stuff right there man..
I might love to listen this type of jazz, but I will probably hate it in a jam context unless I had proper time to practice..

Completely unrelated, but reminded me of 500 Miles High,
another very recognizable track by Corea..

 

This thread has left my brain on the floor many pages ago, but this is why I still check this out every now and then.

Fuck me this is a killer tune. Thank you!

 

Just one thing : harmonic analys is not made by giving options about chord scale. From a perfomer point of view, and the way it is taught all over, roman numeral analyse is more appropriate because it allows one to see what is common in most of the tunes that share what is called "functional harmony", instead of chord by chord. Also there are always a lot of different chord scale possibilites, defining one sound can just close one's mind and ears. The you can check all of this by yourself, this is not "my" point of view, but some knowledge shared by everyone.
I will not give you analysis of "inutil paisagem", because everything that comes from me will be rejected, so it's not worth it.
But i can tell you about where to find all of this info, related to great audio examples and more. There are some goldmine on the web. For free.

 

That's true..
I've outlined a good number of things, but instead focused more on determining what's the implicit Harmony in each part,
rather than on pure grade/numeral analysis, which is also pretty much implicit at sight..

Also these are very peculiar tracks that offer/focus on all that advanced stuff,
rather than on regular diatonic function, so I also focused more on that,
which is where the tracks had more substance to offer..

And ofc because my interest in all of this comes more from the Player/Improviser's perspective,
rather than the structural Composer's point of view.

 

Last edited: Jun 21, 2021

Is there a logic in music? What is it? Is that logic single and unique, or does everyone have their own logic?

 

There's certainly a Fundamental and Solid Logic in Music and Harmony,
but the approach/angle from which it is understood, or direction it's taken, can vary,
and that's up to the Subjective point of view of who's describing/defining or directing it..

It's a fully Featured, Comprehensive and to a very considerable extent, Solid system,
but in some situations, some aspects of it can also be more Ambiguous, or leave more room for Choice/interpretation..
specially from a Compositional point of view.

And it's precisely in this Ambiguity/Room for Choice,
where things can be directed/defined towards a certain direction or another,
and that's where personal choice/style and point of view can be a determining factor.
Afterall there's an almost Infinite number of possibilities..

So yeah -> music/harmony is Logic/Solid,
but not something as Straight and Closed/Restrictive/Binary as Mathematics..

There can be some room for Choice/Interpretation,
and the way one chooses to approach it, is very defining of one's personal style and way of thinking..


Also one can get music going with a certain Basic level of complexity/understanding, and some Empirical practice,
without necessarily being aware of all the Options and Implications that exist on all Levels, or the higher ones..

For instance try to describe/define the Blues..
If you approach it too technically, and try to find all the possibilities that exist on all levels,
and describe how/why they work on a fundamental level.. it can get Bonkers.

But on a Basic level it's: Three Chords and a Pentatonic Scale..

So you can approach, enjoy/play Blues from the Simplest/lowest level,
without necessarily getting into or understanding the full Complete/complex view and Implications,
because on a basic level like magic, it just "Works"..


Musician Explains One Concept in 5 Levels of Difficulty:

 

Last edited: Jun 21, 2021

Both are useful perspectives to investigate because in a session if the producer or composer asks you to do something a certain way that is not where you thought it may go, you may have to pull a rabbit out of a hat. Understanding the composer's intent gives you an inner working knowledge of the process. Improvising is just that and knowing your functional harmony and chord/scale relationships as an improviser combined with composer's intent saves your ass when you have to step outside of the square.

 

I like these comments a lot

Re: Jacob Collier video.. I personally don't enjoy listening to Jacob Collier performing, but I really enjoyed the video because of how good the ideas are and how well Jacob is demonstrating and describing those ideas.

Here's someone else expressing similar ideas from her own perspective

www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6buIdQacoM

We could find countless examples of people expressing similar insights and convictions but in their own personal style; and that's what makes music so brilliant. Analytical theory is really brilliant, informative and useful, but always very impoverished compared to the diversity of what composers and players are really doing.

 

Last edited: Jun 21, 2021

This not the topic of this thread. This thread is focused on a very specific musical question, not a general blurred question that will never receive a clear answer.
To take the same way of thinking than you, I suggest to ask yourself:
Is there an answer to my question?

 

That is precisely what i am talking about: Player/improviser's perspective !
Player/improviser perspective is not dictated by giving fixed options about chord scale choice.
This roman numeral analys is useful to identify harmonic movements that are common to tunes. Musicians that have a good ear rely on that.
It is not needed to have an intellectual knowledge of all of this. I discovered most of this before going to a very well known music school in Boston back in the 80's. You see, i know all of this stuff since decades, i also have been teaching it in music schools.

You said it, you are not in this kind of analys . It shows. So it is not very fair to talk about something you do not know and are not into.
secondary dominants, modal interchange, all of this stuff is the common ground to centuries of music regardless of genre and style.
Knowledge of harmonic movements is maybe the most useful skill to aquire as a Player/improviser's perspective because it allows the improviser's mind to be free and not think from chord to chord, but far ahead. The structural composer's point of view ? Related to jazz and bossa standards ? I am not referring to that, you misunderstand me.
Personally, if i can not "hear" a chord progression,i do not feel easy to improvise and play on it.
"Giant steps" or "Countdown" are easy tunes to analyse on paper. Well, playing on "Countdown" at 320 is another thing !
But if a clever teacher tells you to start playing on the bridge of "have you meet miss Jones", and then divide harmonic rythm by 2, taking away
the "II" in the II-V's, and use this to train your ears and start to get the sound of major thirds modulations, it might help a lot more than just
analysing it. Then if one start to transcribe what masters play on those tunes it might help even more. This "chord scale" stuff is just a small
part of the game. For most students it appears to be more confusing than anything. They become focused on scales and are not even able to play using chord tones and saying something on "Autumn leaves" or "All of me".I am not at all against knowing chord scales, just saying that using only this approach will not be effective. I have seen it and observed this during decades on musicians and students.
Some of the nice things on the web i was talking about :
-"Jazz duets" channel on you tube : Extremely valuable stuff by a great musician and teacher
-Adam Neely's channel on YT. This guy knows his shit , check his brilliant analys of "girl from Ipanema" for example.
-Aimie Nolte's channel on YT : She is also giving lots of useful info.
-Jeff Sneider's channel on YT : Another source of useful tips.
Chad Lefkowitz-Brown's channel on YT: This guy is a beast ! Has also been writing lots of books and videos that are absolutely great, covering a lot's of subjects about impro. Great player great teacher .
Check them out...

 

Brilliant ! Thx for this !

 

Surely, of course they are.

But as I already stated..
I have already outlined Most of the important/significant stuff in a Functional/structural level,
but this wasn't my main focus/goal, because most of it is/can be clearly/easily understood/deduced at First Sight.

You don't need that type of analysis in such a structurally Basic/reduced track like Armando's Rumba,
because it's pretty Obvious what is it doing.. isn't it?

However, the structural/functional grade analysis alone,
cannot give you ALL the information that you need as a player/improviser at first sight,
because that needs a much Closer inspection/analysis and evaluation of the possibilities.. and that's what I Focused on.

Sure, but even when you have the structural/functional analysis, and it can give you very solid/useful clues,
you cannot and will Ever know what's the True Composer's Intent, unless that's exactly specified in ALL Aspects.

You need all of it
and then maybe you will get a better understanding of the composer's intent..

But focusing Solely on the functional/grade analysis doesn't tell you Everything either,
and doesn't tell you everything about the composer's intention..

Because even if you want to adhere to that structure in the most Orthodox/conservative way,
there's usually still a good deal of Room for Choice/interpretation.

Nobody said it is Fixed,
I just presented the options that seemed more Practical/Logical or Tasty (to me) given the Context,
which also include some structural/functional evaluation, even if some of it is not stated..
(because again, that wasn't my focus/goal)

Congratulations!
But let me tell you, you're certainly not the first/only one to understand functional harmony..

No, don't Mix or Make stuff up.
And don't try to create Strawmen arguments.

I said "I'm not really into Secondary Dominants"..

But I'm not the one talking about Secondary Dominants.
Bassdude pointed it out, and I Liked and Accepted the Contribution, because it is indeed very Interesting/useful,
and so far, the only positive/constructive contribution you guys have been able to bring.

And also I didn't ever say "I'm not in this type of analysis",
or much less "I don't know/understand this type of analysis"..

Again, my focus/goal was not that type of analysis,
even tho I did clearly outline most of it.

Of course, one of the most useful and Basic skills..

No, you misunderstand me or make things up,
because I Never Ever mentioned/talked about that in regards to anything you said..

I Agree..
I can enjoy playing Jazz up to a determinate level of let's say "difficulty"..

For instance I can enjoy Solar,
even tho it uses some of this fundamental jazz structures/modulations..

But I cannot enjoy (playing) Giant Steps,
I don't really like how it sounds/makes harmony sound, and since it's modulating so constantly/quickly,
I find it to be unsettling rather than "musical", and in a way it's more of an Intellectual/structural exercise..

It would be Hard and Long to explain,
and I don't want to enter into an infinite discussion about Giant Steps's Musicality... mkay?

But if you're not looking for an excuse to make a strawman argument out of it,
I'm sure you can understand what I mean, and could possibly even agree with me to a certain extent.


But ofc, just like with modern Impressionist art like Pollock or whatever,
it can also be an acquired taste..

The more you're into it, and the more you study/practice it, the more you'll probably dig it/understand it.
And there's many many people who are absolute/total jazz maniacs who only know/like to play this type of music.

However, in my humble opinion, there's more music than Jazz in this World..
And there's more to music than what the regular Jazz point of view/perspective and habits can bring on the table..

I can understand what you mean, and I Agree.
In this type of jazz contexts, using only the scalar approach will not be practical enough..

But also if one approaches it solely from the structural/functional, or chord tones/arpeggios point of view,
you're also leaving half the peas in the plate..

To have a Fully Comprehensive understanding,
BOTH points of view/ways of analysis are necessary.

You need to know and be able to identify the more generic Structural/Functional grade harmony,
but also the more Concrete and closed-in scalar/modal harmonic point of view.

It's Both.


-And that's pretty much it..
If you focused your comments in bringing useful Information, or Interesting Points of view/contributions,
instead of trying to make me a fool because I haven't focused/centered my analysis on the Structural/functional side of things,
(even tho I certainly outlined Most of it..)

Maybe we could be having more of a proper and Fruitful conversation..
(for instance bringing the Secondary Dominant iim/V stuff)

But alas, it's kinda like that good old saying that went..
When the sage points at the Moon, the fool looks at the Finger.

 

Last edited: Jun 21, 2021