Jazz guitar help

[Light]

As far as Mick Goodrick's book goes it is ok just too guitar oriented. I believe in the concept of learning music first then applying it to a particular instrument. You need to climb out of the guitar thought mode

See, and that is exactly what I think Goodrick does - force you to stop thinking like most guitarists (position playing), and start thinking more like a piano or horn player (in a more linier fashion). HE, for certain, doesn't think like most guitar players, and back when I could play I found his book a huge help (damn hands, giving out just when you need them most!)



Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[dogonjon]

Mission Irregular

You can take your diatonic scale and modes there of and merge them with pentatonic major and minor through harmonic and melodic minor scales/aeolian mode. This results in ascending and descending chromatic passages that differ from each other. The sluring of the minor/major 3rd (blue note) ascending and the major 7/ minor 7 descending gives you a chromatic range of a tritone. Tritones can be inverted, extroverted and perverted. Within these versions you have the latitude to play anything you damn well please. There are only two notes in the chromatic scale that you probably should avoid and they differ depending onthe key and whether you are ascending or descending. Your mission should you decide to accept is to learn which notes to avoid while playing as many different notes as possible.

 

[Light]

Thanks for all the input so far everyone. Keep in mind, that I just want to start out with getting a few new chords under my fingers, so I can play a jazz tune and not sound like a complete nit-wit. Soloing? Not too worried about it yet, but I'll most likely keep my simple scales and try and change keys with the song.

Meh, chords are easy (which is not to say they are unimportant!) Unless you are playing Freddie Green, of course, in which case they are a nightmare (that style of big band chord playing is deceptively hard). Other than that, just do what piano players do - play the third and the seventh, plus whatever tensions you feel compelled/are instructed to play. Let the bass player get the root. The fifth is boring anyway, so just leave it out. This is PARTICULARLY true if there is a piano player in the group. He's got 88 notes he can play at any one time, and he is probably going to want to use them. Just stay out of his way, don't play too much, and pretty soon you'll be so busy gigging that you won't have time to post questions on the internet.

Well, maybe not, but as a former teacher of mine likes to say (who would know better than anyone, as he is constantly gigging), "you'll never get hired because you can solo - you get hired because you can groove."

And though my manner may be flip, I'm serious - all you need to play 75% of the time when comping (accompanying) in jazz is the root and the seventh. Tensions are nice, but they're just filler. Try to keep it down to one tension at a time unless you've got a good reason to play more (like it is written in the chart, or that big accent at the end of the melody for Stolen Moments) Same for the root and the fifth. Sure, they are an essential part of the chord (well, not the fifth - in jazz he's just the poor abandoned step child who no one likes that much), but the bass player is going to hit them anyway, so why would you want to worry about them? It's the third and the seventh which carry the function of the chord, which is what you need to worry about the most.

When your comping behind someone else's solo, playing more than the third and the seventh will just get in the way of their thing (at least, if they are any good). Also, you'll get in the way of the bass player, if SHE decides to do anything interesting - which you hope she will! The root and the seventh are the notes which define the function of the chord, and as often as not (more than that, actually), when you are substituting a chord it works because it still has the third and seventh of the original chord.

Take, for instance, the infamous tritone substitution. This is the substitution of any dominant chord with a dominant chord a tritone away. It works particularly well because the third and the seventh of a dominant chord forms a tritone. So you move the root an the fifth by a tritone, but leave the root and the seventh (which, being a tritone, is the main sound in that chord). Of course, they invert - the third is the seventh, and the seventh is the third - but they are the same notes. The other fun thing about a tritone sub is that all those natural tensions in the original chord (the ninth and the thirteenth) become altered tensions in the sub (a sharp or flat ninth, or a sharp 13 - and of course the sharp 11 is actually the original chord's root note!)

You can play more, of course, but most of the time if you just keep yourself to the third and seventh while keeping solid time, other players will love playing with you because you are leaving enough room for them - and there is nothing musicians like more than having enough room for their own ego!

So practice being able to play the third and seventh of any chord on site, and just get in the habit of playing just that unless you have a reason to play more. Also, try to work on being able to voice lead between them. Usually that will mean the voice (i.e., the string) which was playing the third should be playing the seventh on the next chord, and vise versa. At least, when you are playing a ii-V-I they will, but you will be playing a LOT of ii-V-I's if you are playing jazz, so it's a good place to start. Most of the time, if your doing this it works well to just play them on the G and D strings. Every now and then, add a tension (a 9th, 11th, or 13th) on the B string. Don't get stuck in a rut with that, but most of the time that will do the trick.

Obviously, you don't want to do this 100% of the time, but it is almost always appropriate, and seldom inappropriate. Hell, it works in a lot of rock stuff too. If you get that down, you're comping will be light years ahead of most of the guys whose recital's at Berklee drove me to a decade of all but hating jazz. Too many damn notes in their chords - it just sounded muddy.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[Light]

The point I was trying to make with my Giant Steps reference ( and I probably could have made it better ) is that there are many approaches to improvising on Giant Steps. Entire books have been written about it.

Sure. Boring books, but still. (Not knocking them, really, just - I mean, come on.) But as an example of how there is more to jazz than ii-V-I's, it a pretty bad choice. Or that modal soloing isn't easy (it WAS a joke, by the way!) Modal soloing puts the emPHAsis in a different place. I know that. But it IS a lot easier to get to a place where you can at least not have any of your notes sound out of place. It may still sound like pointless noodling, but at least it's in the right key all the time.

Personally, I'm with the late Mr. Pass - Giant Steps is a boring song. At least, when you play it as fast as everyone seems to feel the need to play it. It becomes not much more than an exercise. It makes a LOVELY ballad, though. Too bad no one thinks to play it that way. Even with that, though, `Train did a lot of MUCH more interesting songs.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[Thurgood]

Hey Light, you up early. I agree wit your post about 251, and its use in jazz however, I belieive that the use of the third (maj or min) gives the proper guide tone for the changes. Just my .o2.

still scratching the stuff from my eyes. I hope you all have a good day. I will check out the Levine Books. I also reccomend the Howard Roberts Praxis stuff. A good fellow who taught me much was a good friend of Joe Pass ( Joe even gave him a gtr) Joe will be a great study to anyone interested in Jazz guitar. Be well all. W.

 

[famous beagle]

Meh, chords are easy (which is not to say they are unimportant!) Unless you are playing Freddie Green, of course, in which case they are a nightmare (that style of big band chord playing is deceptively hard). Other than that, just do what piano players do - play the third and the seventh, plus whatever tensions you feel compelled/are instructed to play. Let the bass player get the root. The fifth is boring anyway, so just leave it out. This is PARTICULARLY true if there is a piano player in the group. He's got 88 notes he can play at any one time, and he is probably going to want to use them. Just stay out of his way, don't play too much, and pretty soon you'll be so busy gigging that you won't have time to post questions on the internet.

Well, maybe not, but as a former teacher of mine likes to say (who would know better than anyone, as he is constantly gigging), "you'll never get hired because you can solo - you get hired because you can groove."

And though my manner may be flip, I'm serious - all you need to play 75% of the time when comping (accompanying) in jazz is the root and the seventh. Tensions are nice, but they're just filler. Try to keep it down to one tension at a time unless you've got a good reason to play more (like it is written in the chart, or that big accent at the end of the melody for Stolen Moments) Same for the root and the fifth. Sure, they are an essential part of the chord (well, not the fifth - in jazz he's just the poor abandoned step child who no one likes that much), but the bass player is going to hit them anyway, so why would you want to worry about them? It's the third and the seventh which carry the function of the chord, which is what you need to worry about the most.

When your comping behind someone else's solo, playing more than the third and the seventh will just get in the way of their thing (at least, if they are any good). Also, you'll get in the way of the bass player, if SHE decides to do anything interesting - which you hope she will! The root and the seventh are the notes which define the function of the chord, and as often as not (more than that, actually), when you are substituting a chord it works because it still has the third and seventh of the original chord.

Take, for instance, the infamous tritone substitution. This is the substitution of any dominant chord with a dominant chord a tritone away. It works particularly well because the third and the seventh of a dominant chord forms a tritone. So you move the root an the fifth by a tritone, but leave the root and the seventh (which, being a tritone, is the main sound in that chord). Of course, they invert - the third is the seventh, and the seventh is the third - but they are the same notes. The other fun thing about a tritone sub is that all those natural tensions in the original chord (the ninth and the thirteenth) become altered tensions in the sub (a sharp or flat ninth, or a sharp 13 - and of course the sharp 11 is actually the original chord's root note!)

You can play more, of course, but most of the time if you just keep yourself to the third and seventh while keeping solid time, other players will love playing with you because you are leaving enough room for them - and there is nothing musicians like more than having enough room for their own ego!

So practice being able to play the third and seventh of any chord on site, and just get in the habit of playing just that unless you have a reason to play more. Also, try to work on being able to voice lead between them. Usually that will mean the voice (i.e., the string) which was playing the third should be playing the seventh on the next chord, and vise versa. At least, when you are playing a ii-V-I they will, but you will be playing a LOT of ii-V-I's if you are playing jazz, so it's a good place to start. Most of the time, if your doing this it works well to just play them on the G and D strings. Every now and then, add a tension (a 9th, 11th, or 13th) on the B string. Don't get stuck in a rut with that, but most of the time that will do the trick.

Obviously, you don't want to do this 100% of the time, but it is almost always appropriate, and seldom inappropriate. Hell, it works in a lot of rock stuff too. If you get that down, you're comping will be light years ahead of most of the guys whose recital's at Berklee drove me to a decade of all but hating jazz. Too many damn notes in their chords - it just sounded muddy.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

I think this is great advice on comping in general. Certainly, more is often less when it comes to this. However, there are many reasons to still learn all those chords. Your advice pretty much applies mostly to playing rhythm in an ensemble. But there are other aspects too:

1) When you're playing a solo arrangement, obviously, you need to be able to fill out the sound on your own, so more lush chords are called for sometimes.

2) Learning extensions and chords shapes with them and alterations will greatly improve your soloing and help to get you out of thinking in a scalar rut, which happens to too many players in my opinion. Great soloists usually combine scalar approaches with arpeggios when creating their lines. Charlie Christian and Django are both great examples of how to build lines based off extended chord shapes, as are Wes Montgomery, Pat Metheny, and too many others to name.

I find myself thinking more in terms of chords when I play lead now than scales. I'm thinking mostly about how the notes relate to and sound against a chord. Of course, every once in a while I'll let go with a pentatonic or blues scale flurry, but even then, I usually have a chord shape in mind to which it relates.

If I could make a recommendation, I suggest you check out the instructional video lesson "Jazz Blues Progressoins" at www.guitarinstructor.com (only $1.99).

This will get your feet wet with ii-V-I's, I-VI-ii-V's, and other jazz staples.

 

[K Road]

You know, when dealing with the genre of jazz, we are talking serious music here. Jazz is the most elevated level and expression of popular music. It requires a thorough knowledge of musical theory and how to combine this with musical taste and melodic/harmony execution at speeds of what amounts to spontantious combustion. It also requires an ability to sight read musical notation (well okay, Wes couldn't read). But in any case, the "short cuts" that have been expressed here maybe strategies along the way - but it does not in any way amount to what could be called a recipe for a competent appreciation of, or ability to perform jazz.

There are no short cuts: scales, harmony, melodic sensitivity, tonal aesthetic all have to come together at the point of musical production. Jazz is improvization. And improvization is a more (or less) spontaneous musical act, which, if it is to be convincing and successful, has to combine all of the above elements.

Jazz is a modus operandi - it is not a set formula that exists a priori. I mean, common guys - get real!

K.

 

[famous beagle]

You know, when dealing with the genre of jazz, we are talking serious music here. Jazz is the most elevated level and expression of popular music. It requires a thorough knowledge of musical theory and how to combine this with musical taste and melodic/harmony execution at speeds of what amounts to spontantious combustion. It also requires an ability to sight read musical notation. So any of the "short cuts" that have been expressed here maybe strategies along the way - but it does not in any way amount to what could be called a recipe for a competent appreciation of, or ability to perform jazz.

There are no short cuts: scales, harmony, melodic sensitivity, tonal aesthetic all have to come together at the point of musical production. Jazz is improvization. And improvization is a more (or less) a spontaneous musical act, which, if it is to be convincing and successful, has to combine all of the above elements.

Jazz is a modus operandi - it is not a set formula that exists a priori. I mean, common guys - get real!

K.

While most of this is true, the ability to sightread notation is definitely not required in jazz. To be a working hired gun in NYC, yes obviously it does. But the number of famous, legendary jazz musicians that couldn't read music is surprisingly extensive. Ever heard of Wes Montgomery for starters?

Also, I think saying "jazz is a (more or less) spontaneous musical act" is stretching it a bit. Sure, it's called improvisation, but, especially in the bebop era with super fast tempos, those guys were playing more lines that they'd memorized than they were creating new ones on the spot.

Spend any time transcribing and analyzing some solos and you'll see the same licks crop up over and over. Some players have a larger bag of licks than others.

Obviously, the slower the tempo and/or the fewer the changes, the more "spontaneous creation" can occur, as in the modal jazz movement.

At any rate, jazz is a language. The more you practice, the better you'll speak it.

 

[K Road]

I agree you have a point with the be-bob derivative, and I admit I personally have cut my teeth with the modal - but once the frenetic tempo is slowed down, one has the opportunity to explore melodic ideas without stress and pressure - and at this point a musical aesthetic can come into play with out having to rely on cliches. Removed from insane tempos, all of the above noted elements can be at the disposal of the individual musician, and the more command he/she has of these elements the better the quality of the music will be. No short cuts.

K.

 

[jfrog]

You know, when dealing with the genre of jazz, we are talking serious music here. Jazz is the most elevated level and expression of popular music. It requires a thorough knowledge of musical theory and how to combine this with musical taste and melodic/harmony execution at speeds of what amounts to spontantious combustion. It also requires an ability to sight read musical notation (well okay, Wes couldn't read). But in any case, the "short cuts" that have been expressed here maybe strategies along the way - but it does not in any way amount to what could be called a recipe for a competent appreciation of, or ability to perform jazz.

There are no short cuts: scales, harmony, melodic sensitivity, tonal aesthetic all have to come together at the point of musical production. Jazz is improvization. And improvization is a more (or less) spontaneous musical act, which, if it is to be convincing and successful, has to combine all of the above elements.

Jazz is a modus operandi - it is not a set formula that exists a priori. I mean, common guys - get real!

K.

So kinda what you're saying is....."you'll never get there, so why are you trying to get started?"

I realize that's probably not your intention, but that's the practical application of what you posted.

In reality jazz can be complex and deep, as you pretty much point out, but a lot of people from the world of rock, probably including the original poster, just want to get pointed in the right direction.

 

[Henry Mars]

While most of this is true, the ability to sightread notation is definitely not required in jazz. To be a working hired gun in NYC, yes obviously it does. But the number of famous, legendary jazz musicians that couldn't read music is surprisingly extensive. Ever heard of Wes Montgomery for starters?

Also, I think saying "jazz is a (more or less) spontaneous musical act" is stretching it a bit. Sure, it's called improvisation, but, especially in the bebop era with super fast tempos, those guys were playing more lines that they'd memorized than they were creating new ones on the spot.

Spend any time transcribing and analyzing some solos and you'll see the same licks crop up over and over. Some players have a larger bag of licks than others.

Obviously, the slower the tempo and/or the fewer the changes, the more "spontaneous creation" can occur, as in the modal jazz movement.

At any rate, jazz is a language. The more you practice, the better you'll speak it.

In the old days you could get away with out reading music. These days there are so many damn good players that can read that not being able to read will loose you work ... especially studio work and there is a lot cash to be made there. Also the ability to read music will speed up the learning process and open new musical worlds. The inability to read music will slow you down at some point. The number of famous players that can't read is dwindling fast as these so called old timers die off. A lot has changed in the last 50 years .. I know because I played professionally for at least 42 of them on and off and full time for 10 or so of those years.

 

[famous beagle]

In the old days you could get away with out reading music. These days there are so many damn good players that can read that not being able to read will loose you work ... especially studio work and there is a lot cash to be made there. Also the ability to read music will speed up the learning process and open new musical worlds. The inability to read music will slow you down at some point. The number of famous players that can't read is dwindling fast as these so called old timers die off. A lot has changed in the last 50 years .. I know because I played professionally for at least 42 of them on and off and full time for 10 or so of those years.

Yeah I wasn't advocating not reading (I certainly read), but I was just pointing out that it's not imperative. I did point on in my post that it certainly is a requirement to be a hired gun.

 

[dogonjon]

You guys are good

It's a little out of character for me but I find myself in agreement with all of you who have posted in this thread. Twenty years after I dropped out of the Cornish Institute Jazz program in Seattle (I got kicked out of my rock band for sounding to jazzy and at my ESP review they said I sounded to much like rock so I said screw it I'm going skiing and became a ski instructor for a few decades) I was doing sound for a blues band in Gresham Or, 'Paulette and Power'. The 'Power' was provided by Sonny "Smokin" Hess, the best damn lesbian blues guitarist in the Northwest. I didn't realize it at the time but her style rubbed off on me. When I sat in with my old band mates 'Thin Ice' on a Halloween (I had been the bass player for two years filling in for the bass player and lead singer who had mover to LA to attend GIT, when they returned I was already helping P+P but out of the band) gig I was dressed up in a blues brothers gitup with my hair slicked back and shades. I ran my strat straight and dry and blew the drummers doors off with the tritone and 6th licks I copped from Sonny. He never knew I could play guitar and frankly I was surprised how well it went over

When you talk about 3rd and 7th in a dominant 7 chord your also talking tritone. I also like to use 3rd and octive as well. This 6th interval is very cool and as Light said it defines the tonality while leaving space for bass and solo activity. The fun part is that you can build comp lines with these two conventions that have a melodic counterpoint to the soloist or vocalist.

 

[Henry Mars]

Yeah I wasn't advocating not reading (I certainly read), but I was just pointing out that it's not imperative. I did point on in my post that it certainly is a requirement to be a hired gun.

If a person is content to play covers in bars or clubs forever, not being able to read won't be much of a handicap. I am talking more to the individual who aspires to a career in music be it jazz or whatever.
What convinced me of this was many years ago when I got a call to sub for the guitar player in the Mike Douglas Show band .. If my memory serves me it was Bob D'Nardo at the time. Anyway I turned the gig down because I wasn't confident enough about my reading ability. God only knows what connections I could have made if I was able to play that gig and believe me it wasn't because I didn't have the chops ... I just couldn't read well enough.

 

[eyema_believer]

If a person is content to play covers in bars or clubs forever, not being able to read won't be much of a handicap. I am talking more to the individual who aspires to a career in music be it jazz or whatever.

This is true to an extent. I play for a living, but I can't really read.... I can read simple rhythms, but that's about it. Reading will only help if you have the gift. Back in my clubbing days, I just about had to whip a drummer one night because he was slowing down, and couldn't even tell. I asked him to speed up, and he said "hey man... I've studied at Berkley, and I would know if I was slowing down..." I could tell you story after story like that... and also about folks who never studied music in their life, and were amazing at their art.

I know I'll never be a great jazz player; I just want to learn a little something new. I was in jazz band in high school. My teacher loved my playing, and recommended me to play in a special "All City" jazz orchestra. He sent someone with me to read the music for me, if I had any questions. It worked out rather well.

I am more than a bit afraid, because I will definitely be out of my comfort zone, but that's exactly why I'm doing it. I'm having a great time reading this thread, too!

Peace!

~Shawn

 

[Light]

I think this is great advice on comping in general. Certainly, more is often less when it comes to this. However, there are many reasons to still learn all those chords.

Well, yeah, obviously. As I said, not 100% of the time, but it's still the best advise I ever got on comping in a jazz situation.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[Light]

YJazz is the most elevated level and expression of popular music.

The most "elevated?" WTF, are you a Tenor Sax player or something? That's the only group of musicians I've ever seen whose level of arrogance consistently reaches those levels.

And since when has jazz been popular music? I mean, MAYBE in the 20's and 30's, but since then? No, it's art music. Which is cool. I like art music. But let's not confuse matters. Hell, even in the `20's, it wasn't really pop music. Pop music was Hawaiian music, Al Jolson, Bing Crosby, The Carter Family, or Jimmy Rodgers. Some people enjoyed that jazz stuff, but it wasn't really all that popular by comparison. Louis Armstrong became a pop star - with shit like "It's a Wonderful Life." It didn't have much to do with the Hot Five. And the popular big band stuff of the `30's may have been influenced by jazz, but I would actually call it Jazz. The real jazz was the stuff those guys did after hours in the small clubs - the stuff that evolved into bebop. I'll give you Duke, but even there he never had the kind of popularity of Benny Goodman (who was a great Jazz musician - who seldom let anyone know about it.)

Branford Marsalis was being interviewed right after Sting put together the Blue Turtles, and the interviewer asked him if he was worried about people not liking the music. He said, "Nah. I'm a JAZZ musician - I'm used to playing shit nobody wants to hear!"

Jazz is a modus operandi - it is not a set formula that exists a priori. I mean, common guys - get real!

K.

No shit. Nobody here is trying to teach the guy how to play jazz - we are trying to give him some tools that will help him get his foot in the door and put himself in a position to actually learn. In other words, sink or swim, but you can wear a life jacket.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[Light]

I know I'll never be a great jazz player;

Really wrong attitude to have. Think instead, "I'm going to work really hard to be a great jazz player." You may or may not get there, but who cares? You'll have fun trying, and you'll absolutely improve your playing. No downside there. If you decide upfront you'll never get there you'll never even try.



Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[K Road]

eyema,

Stay away from the Roberts/Hagberg compendium - it works as a reference but not as a method. Besides, the tone is a little smug IMO. Instead, you might try "Jazz Guitar" from the national guitar workshop by Jody Fisher (ISBN: 0 38081 12826 9). It is a method series that in a systematic and accessible way touches on an awful lot of what is involved. It is very user friendly.

Have fun.

K.

 

[Thurgood]

One more reference / practice book that I find helpful (more so in the realm of practice) is the David Baker series on modern jazz. In response to the previos poster about the Roberts series I do agree they are good reference but a bit difficult to wade through. Lots of cool tips on this thread so far. Thanks all. Light a Berkleeite? I hated jazz for years afterwards too. Just now getting back in the "groove" so to speak.