|
|
#16
04-18-2015, 07:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
I have studied both the classical realm and jazz for many years. Both are kind of parallel in many aspects, just different approaches of expressing the final results.
And as some have mentioned, many "advanced" jazz players really are on top of the theory and the approach, but at the cost of sometimes not getting in the playing time. I alway's tell my students that whatever I teach them, some of it they will like, some of it they won't, and while some things will stick with them forever, much of it will be thrown to the wayside. Stick with what they enjoy to play and carve out their own style. Also have confidence in where their ear is directing them to go once they have some basic theoretical concepts figured out ( in the jazz realm). Stick to the style that lets the music flow. Last edited by Dalegreen; 04-21-2015 at 01:47 PM. 
|
|
#17
04-18-2015, 02:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
the cats I hang out with never say jazz theory just call it music theory ...the term jazz theory is a term I have only heard on sites like this never in my world..in college I took music theory ..jazz combo class , jazz big band, jazz improve. but not a jazz theory class.
__________________
" A old guitar is all he can afford but when he gets under the lights he makes it sing'
|
|
#18
04-18-2015, 03:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks alot everyone! All I can say is just WOW.. the more I know about what jazz music really is the more I'm amazed. It blows me away every time.
Since we're talking about theory, and now that I get it that there's only one music theory.. could someone please give me an idea, what does one learn in music theory classes beyond keys, scales and modes, how chords are formed..etc. like what do the "advanced" stuff in theory look like?  Don't need this right now for sure but just curious.. SO curious Thanks
|
|
#19
04-18-2015, 03:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
http://www.shermusic.com/new/1883217040.shtml Good luck!
__________________
Derek Coombs Youtube -> Website -> Music -> Tabs Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs "Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Woods hands pick by eye and ear
Made to one with pride and love To be that we hold so dear A voice from heavens above
|
|
#20
04-19-2015, 08:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
To answer your specific question - "what does one learn in music theory classes beyond keys, scales and modes, how chords are formed..etc. like what do the "advanced" stuff in theory look like?" - I see that as primarily the difference between "diatonic" harmony and "chromatic" harmony. Diatonic harmony is the standard stuff about chords in a key (major or minor key), triads and 7ths, all beginner-intermediate stuff. Chromatic harmony is about all the other things that can be introduced to make it more interesting. These include "secondary dominants", borrowed chords, substitution, reharmonization, etc. Check out the contents pages of these two books: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1423498879/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1423498887/ - and you'll get a good idea of the topics involved, and what characterises "advanced harmony" (book 2 mainly). That's all pretty much classical harmony, but most of the concepts crop up in jazz, even if some of them might have different names. Obviously, in your position, I'd advise you read book 1 (or at least be familiar with all the topics in the contents list) before considering digging deeper. (I've read a few tomes on classical theory, and I'd say those two volumes are among the clearest I've seen.) With those concepts under your belt, you'd be better equipped to appreciate Levine's take on jazz theory - which is very much based on modal jazz and chord-scale theory, concepts not covered (IIRC) in the above books, and which don't apply to pre-1960s jazz. (IOW, Levine talks about jazz as it is now - or as it was when he wrote it! - expecting you to be familiar with how jazz got to that point (from the key-based harmony of the first half of the 20th century. Eg, if you want to understand the music of Duke Ellington, Charlie Parker, Django Reinhardt, etc, Levine is no use at all, IMO. You should have been there, done that  ).Notice, btw, I'm talking "harmony" here, but that's pretty much what "music theory" amounts to in the end (how notes are put together to make intervals, chords, and chord sequences). There are also concepts of "form", which are particularly important in classical theory, less so in jazz (where formal elements are pretty simple and straightforward, in comparison, seeing as it all derives from popular song).
__________________
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen. Last edited by JonPR; 04-19-2015 at 08:24 AM.
|
|
#21
04-19-2015, 09:03 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Derek Coombs Youtube -> Website -> Music -> Tabs Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs "Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Woods hands pick by eye and ear
Made to one with pride and love To be that we hold so dear A voice from heavens above
|
|
#22
04-19-2015, 10:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank you both!
Hi Jon! Just to double check, the two books you referred to are part 1 and part 2 of the same "Harmony & Theory" book by George Heussenstamm, right? By the way, I really appreciate your time and effort to help me. Thanks again!
|
|
#23
04-19-2015, 10:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen.
|
|
#24
04-23-2015, 10:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
" A old guitar is all he can afford but when he gets under the lights he makes it sing' Last edited by EoE; 04-23-2015 at 10:57 AM.
|
|
#25
04-23-2015, 08:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
For those who are still interested in this discussion, got few more questions if you dont mind  -Was Chromatic Harmony first used in jazz music? -And since it's theory and harmony what we're discussing here.. always had this question about scales unanswered.. I know that rockers usually use the pentatonics.. Blues players, they use the blues scale!! And I'm aware of the major scale too, believe it or not (do all music genres use the major scale by the way?!) But what about the other scales.. like dorian and others.. First what are they? Or the common ones in case there's too many And then in what music genre(s) each one of them is used? And finally, does jazz make use of ALL types of scales? Thanks Last edited by NewGuitarist; 04-23-2015 at 08:15 PM.
|
|
#26
04-24-2015, 02:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
learning music theory ( applied to jazz) is a lot like learning mathematics, to understand a piece of theory you have to start at the beginning and keep adding new pieces/scales/ formula's to that foundation.
I would start with: - the major scale - Learn the diatonic chord sequence that can be formed from this scale ( Cmaj7-Dm7-Em7-FMmaj7-G7- Am7-Bm7b5) all thes chord are formed by "stacking" root-3-5-7 notes from the scale. A sequence often referred to as: Imaj7-IIm7-IIm7-iVmaj7-V7-VIIm7-VIIIm7b5 ( the roman numbering because this pattern can be applied to every key) - Pentatonics use the 5 notes from the major scale that sound good over all these diatonic chords in the sequence - Every major key has a paralel minor key 1,5 step down from it ( c -> am, G -> Em etc.) the pentatonic scale of c is the minor pentascale of Am! So learning 1 scale gives you two keys to solo in! - a blues scale builds on the pentatonic scale by adding 2 "blue"notes" ( flatted 3 and 7) to give it the blues flavor... If you understand this in all keys and learn to apply these scales/forms over the neck, you can play/solo on 80% of the pop/funk/blues etc. From there you can go on the extend youre palette with more "exotic" scales and common patterns/chord sequences. You learn the function of each chord and it's specific tonal "colour" in the sequence. Why sounds the V chord like "tension"a gives returning to the I chord a feel off resolution. All these mechanisms can be explained from the theory and you learn to apply them. Then you forget it and PLAY!
__________________
Gallagher D71 Special Gibson Nashville Custom 2013 1963 ES-335 Ibanez Vintage OM Last edited by john.westhoff; 04-24-2015 at 03:04 AM.
|
|
#28
04-24-2015, 03:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Gallagher D71 Special Gibson Nashville Custom 2013 1963 ES-335 Ibanez Vintage OM
|
|
#29
04-24-2015, 03:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
"Diatonic" is really harmony with the training wheels on. You can't go wrong, you can't fall over. But neither can you do much that's interesting or exciting; that's for when you can control the diatonic bike properly.As far back as we know anything about how music was made (in Europe at least) there were always standard sets of scales on the one hand, and common ways of occasionally altering them (adding chromatics) on the other. It certainly goes back to the modal era, before "Harmony" as we know it existed. Where jazz harmony differs from classical is not so much in the basic principles (diatonic and chromatic), but in their application, which is more kind of "freewheeling", less complex. I.e., classical theory has all kinds of rules (practices) about how particular chromatics are applied. Jazz cares less about the fine details, although the usages are broadly similar in effect. The main differences between jazz and classical are not actually in their harmonic practices at all, but in terms of rhythm and attitude. African-American culture has a totally different approach to music (its creation and performance) than European classical culture does, and jazz reflects that. Quote:
. We use lots of other scale types, but they all tend to be referred back to major, as if it's the mother of all scales.In fact it isn't. The major scale as we know it only came into being in Europe a few centuries ago. Before that - for at least 1000 years - there were "modes". The major KEY (and its sidekick the minor key) came to dominate European classical music from around 1600, and all popular music thereafter. But - as "natural" as it sounds to us now - it's an artificial system. The idea of "key" (especially the narrow diatonic view, everything coming from the major scale) is rather like the western tradition for men to wear suits . A suit is smart, feels good, and is considered "normal". But it can also feel restricting in terms of the movement it allows. And the fact that every man is supposed to wear one is both a good and bad thing. Good, because it's a simple rule we can follow to help us fit in; bad, because it allows very little self expression. When we look outside the European major-minor key system - at European folk cultures as well as other ethnic cultures around the world - we obviously find a lot more variety in how notes are put together. From a European classical perspective, other musical cultures can look "primitive", but it's only in harmony where that term properly applies. In other aspects (melody, rhythm, timbre, form, etc), other cultures are frequently more sophisticated than classical music Eg, we certainly find examples of the use of 7-note scales (eg in Indian raga, or Persian maqams), very similar in concept to our scales and modes. But their systems of organisation are very different; lacking harmony almost entirely, and building complexity out of form, rhythm and melody - and including improvisational elements too. African cultures - relevant for American popular music - tend to make rhythm primary, along with a kind of modal drone idea of melody. In comparison with all that, the idea of the "diatonic major key" can seem a little stiff: it's simplistic, even childish, but also stuffy. (The idea of "improvisation" became outlawed in classical culture, even though all the great composers were renowned for their improvisation as individual performance.) Nevertheless, it is the foundation of the peculiar European art of "harmony" - the way we like to stack notes on top of one another, to make one complex sound out of several simultaneous simple ones. So, as long as we like those things called "chords", and want to make music with them, the traditional concept of the major scale, and of major and minor keys, will remain an essential plank of "music theory".
__________________
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen.
|
|
#30
04-24-2015, 03:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
[CONT...]
Quote:
In Europe, the "modal" era predated the "key" era, and ran for much longer (more than twice as long as keys have so far lasted). The major and minor "keys" evolved out of two modes: Ionian and Aeolian. The previous ruling modes (Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian, Mixolydian) fell out of favour, because keys represented a whole new and exciting way of making music, using this new concept of "harmony", leading to the chord and chord progression system we know now. However, in the late 19th century, classical composers (or rather Romantic ones, as that period has been dubbed) began to feel the major-minor key system was exhausted. Been there, done that! They began to look for new ways of composing. Some - mostly French - hit on the old modal system (Debussy, Ravel, Satie), among other ideas, and their music became known as "Impressionism", because its moods tended to be contemplative, naturalistic. Others went for more challenging concepts such as poytonality, atonalism, serialism, or experimented with other ways of dividing the octave. Meanwhile, popular music stuck with keys, because they were easy and familiar, and you couldn't exactly sing along to Stravinsky.... Jazz then followed classical in divorcing itself from public taste, when bebop developed in the 1940s. But - while that employed a lot more edgy chromaticism than earlier "pop jazz" - it still dealt in chord sequences in major and minor keys. It wasn't until the late 1950s that Miles Davis (for it was he) finally got tired of bebop - much as 19thC Romantics got tired of keys - and looked for something "cooler", more relaxing and open-ended. Enter pianist Bill Evans, schooled in Debussy and Ravel. Miles was also inspired by African music, and by childhood memories of gospel singing. What emerged from that was so-called "modal jazz", in which keys - and even traditional chords - were abandoned, and everything was down to a scale and melodic exploration within that scale. (Any chords used were more or less random collections of notes from the scale; there were no "progressions".) In this way, those four archaic medieval modes - Dorian, Mixolydian, Phrygian, Lydian - found their way back into western music, albeit in a form no medieval monk would have recognised! Rock, meanwhile, taking its inspiration from blues and country (ie musics deriving from a marriage of African and mostly Celtic folk forms), also found itself playing in an arguably modal way, totally unawares. Of course, inasmuch as rock musicians have grown up with western pop culture (whether they get any theory education or not), they tend to feel major and minor keys are their foundation, even while they treat them in a very liberal modal fashion. What that means is that a rock song in a major key will rarely restrict itself to the diatonic content of that key. It will probably add a bVII chord (which we can call a "mixolydian" effect). It might also add bIII and bVI chords, or even a minor IV chord - which we can call "borrowing from the parallel minor", or "mode mixture". IOW, rock music very much likes the idea of a single key centre in a song, and also likes traditional chords built in 3rds - but also likes to bend things around; not just blues-style melodic bends and swoops, but combining elements from major and minor keys (or modes) on the same keynote. So a song "in E" might contain stuff from E major, E minor, E mixolydian, etc. Rock musicians don't want to wear that stuffy E major "suit" . They wanna loosen up, man.... When it comes to defining genres, btw, you can't really define them through scale use. Most popular genres use the same common scales (although jazz tends to use more than most). Genres are distinguished more by things like choice of instruments, or attitudes to improvisation or rhythm. (If it's a mandolin, it must be bluegrass. If it's a sax it must be jazz. You know the kind of thing....  The players might be using the exact same scales, but you know the difference.)Quote:
It will use the major and minor key scales (including harmonic and melodic minor) - at least when playing in old-fashioned keys, like in jazz standards of the 20s/30s/40; It will use the other four modes - especially when playing the modal jazz of the 1960s; And it will use synthetic scales like diminished and wholetone (more for improvisation than composition). Jazz since the 1960s, btw, has freely mixed keys and modes (along with rock influences and atonal "free" influences), such that it's often difficult (or pointless) to try to separate the concepts. What ties it all together is improvisation.
__________________
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen.
|
