Using Dissonance

  • Thread starter Thread starter 64Firebird
  • Start date Start date
64Firebird

64Firebird

New member
It seems to me that some of my fav players will sometimes just play anything, in key or not, let it hang a few seconds and then resolve it to whatever chord they're playing over. Are there any music theory rules for using this kind of thing?
 
Is there an example player you have in mind? I have heard this kind of thing too.
 
Jeff Beck does this kind of thing all the time - particularly his bends. He'll hit notes in 1/4 tones and such and resolve back to notes in key.

EVH does it quite often too. Rather than palying in key, he'll play a symmetrical fretboard pattern. Take the intro to Hot For Teacher i.e., or the solo in "On Fire".

Yngwie does it in kind of a different way: instead of playing out of key and then landing on his feet, he plays out of time and and lands on his feet rythmically. I like to call it "note cramming". He will wail out a scale AFAP and then land where he wants on the beat.

This might sound silly, but I've often mused on how music would sound if it were based not on musical scales resolving to their roots, but on dissonant sounds resolving to harmonious ones.

Aaron
http://www.voodoovibe.com
 
Oh....
and to answer the question - there are no theory rules I know of. I think as far as the guitar goes it's more a matter of geometric fingerboard patterns. They are easy to play because the fingering revolves around a repeating pattern that doesn't change from string to string or postion to position, but drifts in and out of key for the same reason.

One other thing that you might think about is Joe Satriani's philosophy of "pitch axis", I think he calls it. Rather than playing in a traditional key, he picks a note -"A" for example- and then creates a chord progression with all chords revolving around the note "A". For example: A, Amin, Asus4, Adim, A. I'm sure you can find some literature that would explain it better. Listen to the solo in "Satch Boogie" for an example. (And probably many other Satriani songs).

Aaron
http://www.voodoovibe.com
 
Thanks guys that helps some. I was think more like Jimi Hendrix doing the Star Spangled Banner. I used to know it note for note, but I could never find any principles to base other things on. I know a lot of you guys just think of that song as noise, but I think it's masterful, maybe the best thing he ever did on a recording.
 
I heard jazz musicians (which I am not) say that there is no such thing as a wrong note. Good ones can always resolve it. By the way, I don't think that first-rate jazz guitarists play patterns. They actually think theory as they play.
 
In jazz, they talk of playing inside or outside.
Inside playing is in the diatonic key. Outside playing uses diminished and wholetone scales that share SOME notes in common (so it doesn't sound Sun Ra weird) but enough strangeness to give you that "outside" feel.
As an easy example, play a blues in A. On the last V chord (E), instead of playing E based licks, try A# penta resolving the last few notes to A pentatonic.In fact, try playing the exact same lick in A# and A over that last measure of the turnaround.
 
I've heard that from Jazz guys too (all 12 notes are good). And I can hear it the playing of guys like Miles Davis (the horn player). But, the Jazz guys don't really ride it like a lot of the blues guys do. Muddy waters just flores me.
 
Tom Hicks said:
In jazz, they talk of playing inside or outside.
Inside playing is in the diatonic key. Outside playing uses diminished and wholetone scales that share SOME notes in common (so it doesn't sound Sun Ra weird) but enough strangeness to give you that "outside" feel.
As an easy example, play a blues in A. On the last V chord (E), instead of playing E based licks, try A# penta resolving the last few notes to A pentatonic.In fact, try playing the exact same lick in A# and A over that last measure of the turnaround.
Click to expand...

Okay, now that's something I can get my teeth into. I understand that. It's sort of like playing the a chord sub (Bb7 instead of E7). Is that the kind of thing you mean?
 
By the way, I don't think that first-rate jazz guitarists play patterns. They actually think theory as they play.
Click to expand...

I bet that's not really quite true. First off, if they have to think at all, they're not making it. The theory needs to be so ingrained that it's second nature.

And patterns are the way the fingers learn where everything is. One can appear to be pattern-free but it's only a matter of degree. I imagine sometimes the best guys play so freely that everything they play they have never played before. But I bet those nights are rare even for the best, and they usually play stuff they've worked out. Besides, that's a big part of what makes an individual's style -- the particular phrases that you tend to use a lot.

I've heard it said that in all of the material Charlie Parker ever recorded, you could break all the solos down to about 200-odd different patterns, played at different tempos and in different orders, maybe starting and stopping late or early.

I would say that the first-rate jazz guitarists have an uncanny sense of phrasing and putting the notes and patterns together in a way that sounds natural, personal, and compelling. It's like the difference between the way people talk -- everyone knows the same words but some people just put them together in such a perfect, sensible, interesting way, and with such compelling phrasing and style, while others just talk and talk and make you yawn.
ALl the great players I've ever heard interviewed say that they work at this stuff from very simple constructions so they don't have to think about what they play... the thinking comes during learning, analyzing stuff, and trying to implement ideas during practice ("woodshedding"), and when writing and arranging... When they are on the gig or in the studio, they try not to think at all...

There are probably people who know so much theory that no one could touch them, and they can actually think of ten different things they can try over the chords that are about to come up, and hear what the piano player just decided to do and thereby react to it, turning on a dime... but it won't sound very good no matter how they try, because they don't have the key elements that make a great improvisor. It's not knowledge, though knowledge doesn't hurt.
 
Last edited:
I bought a McLaughlin book way back in the day, he gave some real good detail about the kind of outside playing he was doing - it was actually inside, but with a very different set of rules.

For example, Birds of Fire worked over 2 chords:

G#7#9#5 : G# F# B C E (I'm using enharmonics), and
A#7b9b5 : A# G# B D E

Over those chords, he could switch between Em pentatonic (because the E and B were in both chords) and A# whole tone (I think), though there are a number of scales that track pretty closely, like E Hungarian.

There are some shredders out there who just go out and come back in, but others seem to know exactly what they're doing - modern harmonic theory can give you some good ideas about what might work, and it might not sound all that strange to our ears: film music has been using these kinds of dissonance for years.

Daf
 
Back when I was in a jazz ensemble (ah the grand ol college days), my professor had a warm reminder about me playing the "wrong" note.... he would say to me "you made two mistakes Dave.... first the wrong note, second... trying to go back and fix it".

His point was well made. Music is a living art. It grows and changes and moves. It tends to breath and take a shape of its own. There can't really be a wrong note if it gets you, and the energy of the music, to where it is meant to be.

Over the years of improvising and shooting from the hip I have learned. Sometimes, if I hit a "wrong" note in a riff or solo, I will repete the pattern (intentionally playing said "wrong" note) and making it become a part of the new riff.

So in some styles or genres of music there are "rules" to music theory. Certain "acceptable" patterns of progressions, I, IV, V....
plagal cadences, specific modes and so on. But in improvisation nothing is cast in stone. Moods are created, passions unleashed. Good or bad, ryte or wrong..... its your magick.
 
All this is great, but can I just play anything as long as I resolve it back to a chord tone? I'm really starting to think that this is the case.
 
No set answer. No ryte or wrong. Theres what works, and theres not. Granted theres a point where it can sound like mud slopping along that finally gets to the root note again (Neil Young referance again) and that may set well with you (and your audience. Other folks prefer a more traditional structure.

Here's some theory math for you.
There are 12 semi-tones (half steps) in any given key. Most toe tapping hummable music is written using 3-4 chords...
The root key generally being considered 1, lets consider that a "C" for arguments sake. 8 semitones up the chromatic (half-step) scale is translated to the 5th chord (G). It is called the V (5th) because that chord (G) is actually the 5th of the root (C). To explain.. the notes of a C(major chord) are C(1),E(3),G(5). So making a new chord with the root keys (c) fifth, creates a pleasant chord that "fits" with the Cmajor. If you play a C-major and a G-major chord, and the notes that make them up... it "fits".
Does this make any sence at all?
Bottom line, traditionally any note that is a part of the Root Key's scale (in this case "c") will fit and sound happy. Any note that falls outside the traditional C major scale (in this case) is "atonal" or dissonant. Its not to say that these outside notes can't make it in and resolve... but in general rules they do not fit the key.

Further point of confusion, technically if you play a whole lot of non-key related notes (outside the ro scale), then you have changed the key alltogether. No matter what key or how many you go thru..... if it fits great. if it creates chaos (RE:Bartok) it risks loosing appeal.
 
I love hearing players go "outside" with their playing-one little trick I use occasionally is this shape:


-------I-------I--3---I

-------I---2---I------I

---1---I-------I------I


This will sound wierd on any set of strings-in any key lol-and you can take off from any familiar note-into these shapes--and land back to your familiar ground when you like as well. When I play-covers and I get bored I'll throw a few of these in there just to get a laugh out of the band and a strange look out of the audience "That riff wasn't in the original Steve Miller song?!"
 
Hey 'bird, check out this thread:

http://www.homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=51747&highlight=diatonic+and+harmonized

and if you'd like to email me, we can discuss in more detail if you like.

The type fo thing you're wanting to hear is:

Using the chord substitution of a Db7 arpeggio over a G7 chord resolving to a C chord.

G7 and Db7 have two of the same notes - the F is the major third of Db and the flatted 7th of G, and the B is the major third of the G and the flatted 7th of the Db.
The other two notes of the Db7 chord are Db, the flat 5th of the G7 and Ab - the flat 9 of the G7.
So by using that Db7 arpeggio over the G7 chord, you are adding the flat 5 and the flat 9 to the sound. Which is the first step ti 'outside' playing.

But you should resolve going in to the C chord - so it sounds like you know what you're doing and it's not a mistake.
The strongest resolution is the fifth of the chord - in this case, the 'G' note for the chord of C. You can also resolve to the third (E), the root (C) or the seventh (B or Bb, depending on what th eroot chord is).
 
Thanks Foo, that is sort of what I was thinking. My computer is down right now and I'm using a friends tonight, so I can't e mail you. I guess it's just tough for me to figure this sort of thing out couse I'm not playing in a band these days. Otherwise, I could just give it a try and se what happens.
 
Wow, reading all this theory is making me forget how to play.

:D

One trick I've used for years to cover wrong notes when soloing is to simply bend the wrong note up until it resolves, then do it again to let'em know you meant it.;)

Soloing over a pedal tone can make it easier to explore how much you can get away with as well. Zappa did this a lot.

Don't forget about chromatic scales. Dave Mustaine is a master of chromatic soloing.

Like was mentioned already the only real trick to using dissonance is not the dissonance itself, but how you resolve it.:cool:
 
Its the old music theory rule

Once you know the rules then you can break them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top