Quote:
Originally Posted by athair
It seems like one of the main obstacles when trying to approach jazz music (iīm not even talking about learning, at this stage) lies within a sort of misleading state of things regarding the "tonal music vs modal harmony music" issue.
We may recall that some improvisation defines jazz music: but the question of how long is improvisation appart from harmony theory, gets easily overlooked (as far as i know)...
For instance, when i listen to many tunes by Pat Metheny (one among other jazz musicians i enjoy)...i canīt but hardly isolate one of either axes within his music (tonal vs modal)...and so on...
|
Very true. Metheny is a post-modal player, which means he incorporates a mix of both systems. Functional harmony can have modal elements added, and vice versa.
I agree that with modern jazz (meaning pretty much everything of the last 50 years, at least), it doesn't make much sense to try and dissect the functional from the modal. The distinction is important when studying (and playing) older styles of jazz - at least if one wants to sound "authentic". (But then I regard playing bebop as a revivalist exercise: educational, for sure, but not really what "jazz" is about today.)
The principle which applies to Metheny as much as to Louis Armstrong (one of his heroes) is the idea of
working with the given material; taking off from the tune.
There may be many theoretical principles one can apply to the material - in terms of naming, categorising or conceptualising it - but the bottom line is pretty simple, and it's not rocket science.
You have a tune, and you have a chord progression. Playing notes that are in the chords is "inside", and chromaticism is "outside". There is a constant dialogue between both, which is not hard to comprehend. Too much inside = dull and safe; too much outside = wrong notes. And a melodic and rhythmic sensibility is what governs the choices.
All that's required is a
thorough knowledge of (a) one's instrument and (b) the tune one is about to improvise on. ("Thorough" may mean playing the melody and chords for hours, over and over, in as many positions - or even keys - as one can. You have to know it inside out.)
There is no need to enter into chord-scale theory (nor into a functional/modal dichotomy): that's a system of
applying rules, putting the material into boxes, suggesting options. It might be a useful thing to do if you have no ideas. But if you have no ideas, maybe you shouldn't be playng a solo anyway...
