Question about minor scales

[Bruce Clausen]

I guarantee Armstrong, Parker, Diz, etc. did not think in terms of chord/scales but played based off of the actual chords.

This seems a little simplistic to me. It seems to me that the classic great jazz players have worked from: the melody of the tune (and sometimes the lyrics too); its tonal structure (phrases, sections, key changes, etc.); the traditional melodic language of jazz (including the blending of European and non-European scales and sounds); the traditional rhythmic elements of jazz; and the possibilities inherent in the chords themselves. The last often involves creating interesting links between chords through extensions and chromatic alterations.

I don't hear many great solos whose basis is arpeggios-- or scales either, for that matter. The player needs to know at all times what key he's (she's) in, and where the phrase is leading harmonically, and what notes are in the chords-- but there's much more to improvisation than that.

By the way, I taught a college course called "Jazz Theory" for some years long ago. I remember using a book by Jerry Coker, but never looked into the Aebersold series, which seemed to be for practising, not for learning theory. The students already had had some classical theory, and we did lots of structural and tonal analysis of tunes and improvised solos.

And yes, the Hindemith book is well worth while, but personally I got more out of Schoenberg's Structural Functions of Harmony.

[Tom Wright]

There is reason to believe John Coltrane found a copy of Nicholas Slonimsky's Dictionary of Musical Scales which then informed his "sheets of sound".

I have played a lot of Hindemith but didn't bother with his text, as his music teaches much of the lessons. He seems mainly to look for a melody and appropriate bass line and then find interior lines that help out. I look at jazz chords the same way, as a modern figured bass that suggests the bass note and the melody note with a shorthand to fill out the inner lines.

I've found myself writing in this way, hearing a melody I wanted to find harmony for, and having to choose unexpected chords to accommodate the melody and bass line.

I improvise with melody fragments, arpeggio fragments, rhythmic patterns, and obvious quotes. There is a chord-heavy style, which tends to leave me mystified. Other jazz players use rhythm and melody elements---I would say Michael Brecker is more melodic than arpeggiating.

[DavidKOS]

This seems a little simplistic to me. It seems to me that the classic great jazz players have worked from: the melody of the tune (and sometimes the lyrics too); its tonal structure (phrases, sections, key changes, etc.); the traditional melodic language of jazz (including the blending of European and non-European scales and sounds); the traditional rhythmic elements of jazz; and the possibilities inherent in the chords themselves. The last often involves creating interesting links between chords through extensions and chromatic alterations.

I don't hear many great solos whose basis is arpeggios-- or scales either, for that matter.)

Frankly, I was trying to make it simplistic to make a point.

It's about following the chord changes - not literal arpeggios, although Coleman Hawkins, Trane, and others did that at times.

Yes, a great jazz solo uses all the elements you mentioned.

But is is based on playing through the chord changes and form of any given tune.

Chord changes, as typified by the skeleton that arpeggios provide, is the basis of jazz improv.

If you can't play the chords, you can't play the tune.

Also I was comparing the chord arpeggio/chord tone method in comparison to the Aebersold method.

Feel free to use whatever method, but I can cite examples throughout the history of recorded jazz to prove my points.

However, it seems most of you guys only want to use the chord scale method and think that's all there is, so be it.

It's not my job to convince you.

[DavidKOS]

There is reason to believe John Coltrane found a copy of Nicholas Slonimsky's Dictionary of Musical Scales which then informed his "sheets of sound".

Yes, he did. It was part of the development of the "sheets of sound" concept:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheets_of_sound

"Coltrane employed extremely dense improvisational yet patterned lines consisting of high speed arpeggios and scale patterns played in rapid succession"

Note the use of arpeggios!

"Further, this open approach allowed Coltrane to arpeggiate three chords simultaneously, a style Monk initially taught Coltrane"

Again arpeggios.

[Stevo75]

My old guitar teacher always used to say the following with respect to which notes are the most important when improvising (in order from most important to least important):

1) The notes that make up the current chord (arpeggios, playing the changes)
2) The notes in the scale of whatever key you're in
3) All the rest of the notes

[DavidKOS]

My old guitar teacher always used to say the following with respect to which notes are the most important when improvising (in order from most important to least important):

1) The notes that make up the current chord (arpeggios, playing the changes)
2) The notes in the scale of whatever key you're in
3) All the rest of the notes

He was exactly in line with what I learned.

the chord...the key....chromatics

It may be that those of us that got our jazz education before the Aebersold method became so popular have another view of jazz.

The first Aebersold books were released in 1967, but didn't get popular until the later 70's. I was already playing pro jazz gigs in New Orleans by then.

We were taught like your teacher suggested.

[Mark Gunter]

What minor scales do people actually practice and use? Natural? Harmonic? Melodic?

This:

Eventually it benefits one to learn everything, but start out where it solves an immediate problem you are struggling with.

When you read the above theory discussions, and especially if you follow the links and references in the last few posts, it becomes painfully apparently how deep and wide the ocean of music is. For that reason, to me, the basic answer about what to practice is that I need to practice on improving what I can already do, and practice on learning whatever currently interests me ... as Jeff writes, start out where it solves an immediate problem or answers a current interest ... and go from there.

As far as routine goes, I'll practice scales and arpeggios in all twelve keys, major and relative minor, focusing on technique. Working on specific scales, chords, etc. is determined by what song, tune, music I'm actually learning to play at the time.

[DavidKOS]

As far as routine goes, I'll practice scales and arpeggios in all twelve keys, major and relative minor, focusing on technique.

You can't go wrong with that.

All the other scales are just variations on the basic ones anyway.

Besides, natural minor, Dorian, melodic, and harmonic minor cover most needs.

[Pete Martin]

Pete, where is this jazz theory written down as such? I'm not debating you, just curious if I'm out-of-date with the current academic world.

I just looked at 2 books used by many (including colleges) as theory resources, "Jazzology" and Mark Levines "Jazz Theory". Both mention "Melodic Minor" as 1 2 b3 4 5 6 7. No mention at all of anything different descending.

I teach a lot of jazz improv these days, plus looking to learn myself, so I am constantly looking at books, online and at YouTube for ideas and inspiration. I do have to report that most of these folks use "Melodic Minor" to just be one set of notes. Occasionally they mention the classical version and say it is different, but then always say in Jazz it is used the one way both ascending and descending.

In any endeavor, a language develops so to probably help people talk about it, exchange ideas and allow people to teach it. I guess because of this, I have been using the term "Melodic Minor" this same way. I apologize if I have caused any confusion.

"The jazz minor scale is a derivative of the melodic minor scale, except only the ascending form of the scale is used. As the name implies, it is primarily used in jazz. "

I used to hear "Jazz Minor" ocassionally, but had a college theory professor tell me they got away from this as there are several minor scales jazz players use, and the term "Jazz Minor" seemed to cause more confusion. Thus the term "Melodic Minor" became common, then the standard term.

[Simon DS]

JS Bach probably played great arpeggio solos.

[Tom Wright]

I think it is safe to say any melody has both scale and arpeggio elements.

Mozart's "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik" begins with two arpeggios. Beethoven's violin concerto begins with a scale. Both go on to use the other.

Big Mon begins with scale patterns, uses chordal shapes in the bridge.

The Parker/Gillespie bop tune "Shawnuff" begins with a scale shape in the first measure and uses an arpeggio in the second measure.

The folk song "Go Tell Aunt Rhody" is basically only scales, but jumps to a higher note in the chord to begin the next phrase.

Our national anthem begins with an arpeggio, but uses scale patterns after.

[August Watters]

It may be that those of us that got our jazz education before the Aebersold method became so popular have another view of jazz.

I studied both approaches as a student. As part of the generation that grew up on Aebersold, I studied with David Baker at Indiana -- he was from that post-bop scene in Indianapolis, 1950s, that included Clifford Brown and Wes Montgomery. Baker had us working on a scale-oriented approach to soloing, often using Aebersold recordings.

That approach didn't really work well for me -- the players who did well with it got into the "change running" approach. I needed something more closely related to the harmonic structure, for confidence. Which is why as a Berklee student in the early 80s, it was a big "aha" experience when I studied guitar with Garrison Fewell. He talked about how the approach of the early, pre-bop guitar players was built around arpeggios, with voice leading. Garrison was magical in his ability to play elegant lines and always land on a chord tone at the point of the next chord change. So I got into working on his approach to improvising, using arpeggios as an organizing factor, with voice-leading to bring you to the next chord. I've had a book in progress for a few years, outlining a practice method based on this approach. Won't be too much longer until it's finished, I hope!

[DavidKOS]

That approach didn't really work well for me -- the players who did well with it got into the "change running" approach. I needed something more closely related to the harmonic structure, for confidence. Which is why as a Berklee student in the early 80s, it was a big "aha" experience when I studied guitar with Garrison Fewell. He talked about how the approach of the early, pre-bop guitar players was built around arpeggios, with voice leading. Garrison was magical in his ability to play elegant lines and always land on a chord tone at the point of the next chord change. So I got into working on his approach to improvising, using arpeggios as an organizing factor, with voice-leading to bring you to the next chord. I've had a book in progress for a few years, outlining a practice method based on this approach. Won't be too much longer until it's finished, I hope!

Well I certainly want to read that, as a fan of your other books, I'm looking forward to it.

"how the approach of the early, pre-bop guitar players was built around arpeggios"

That says it as better than I have have been trying to - it's the traditional way of playing jazz.

thanks

[bluesviolin]

.... and don't forget the bluesviolin extended minor blues/kinda dorian scale. 1 2 b3 4 b5 5 6 b7 or A B C D Eb E Gb G (A)

I'm gonna copyright it, make a fortune, fly out to Cremona, and pick up a coupla fiddles.

[bluesviolin]

.... and don't forget the bluesviolin extended minor blues/kinda dorian scale. 1 2 b3 4 b5 5 6 b7 or A B C D Eb E Gb G (A)

I'm gonna copyright it, make a fortune, fly out to Cremona and pick up a coupla fiddles.

[DavidKOS]

.... and don't forget the bluesviolin extended minor blues/kinda dorian scale. 1 2 b3 4 b5 5 6 b7 or A B C D Eb E Gb G (A)

I'm gonna copyright it, make a fortune, fly out to Cremona and pick up a coupla fiddles.

blues/rock guitar players have been using this for along time....no patent!

[bluesviolin]

...then I didn't need to post it twice? I guess I shouldn't 'Go Advanced'

...how 'bout a copyright for the other 2 scales, same notes different tonics?

[DSDarr]

Which is why as a Berklee student in the early 80s, it was a big "aha" experience when I studied guitar with Garrison Fewell. He talked about how the approach of the early, pre-bop guitar players was built around arpeggios, with voice leading. Garrison was magical in his ability to play elegant lines and always land on a chord tone at the point of the next chord change. So I got into working on his approach to improvising, using arpeggios as an organizing factor, with voice-leading to bring you to the next chord. I've had a book in progress for a few years, outlining a practice method based on this approach. Won't be too much longer until it's finished, I hope!

Mentioning Garrison Fewell reminds me of his guitar improv books. The titles are something like "Jazz Improv - A Harmonic Approach" and "Jazz Improv - A Melodic Approach". I had looked at the melodic approach book at one point and I thought it looked interesting. I also remember thinking that it seemed pretty "harmonic", rather than "melodic", though perhaps I didn't spend enough time with it. Do you know if either of these covers what you refer to here as "using arpeggios as an organizing factor, with voice-leading to bring you to the next chord"? In any event, I will be looking forward to your book.

thanks, David

[bluesviolin]

blues/rock guitar players have been using this for along time....no patent!

I'm not convinced that this minor scale can be as easily dismissed as per the above, taking into account the two other scales with C and E tonics. The thread is about minor scales. to the best of my knowledge, every minor scale discussed in these 2 pages has been documented except the ones I listed with A and E tonics, dorian and aeolian respectively, both minor 3rds, both minor scales, yes?

if blues/rock guitar players have been using the A tonic for a long time, doesn't it stand to reason that other players, in other genres, perhaps with other instruments should also have been using the same scale notes with the C & E tonics? it looks (and sounds) to me that the 3 are linked together.

for anyone who hasn't a clue what I'm talking about, you would need to see my thread '8 note bebop scales'. as 2 out of 3 scales I list are minor scales, I think it pertains to this thread.

[DavidKOS]

I'm not convinced that this minor scale can be as easily dismissed as per the above, taking into account the two other scales with C and E tonics. The thread is about minor scales. to the best of my knowledge, every minor scale discussed in these 2 pages has been documented except the ones I listed with A and E tonics, dorian and aeolian respectively, both minor 3rds, both minor scales, yes?

Well, you may be right. Those scales look a lot like what typical blues-rock players use a lot though.

[bluesviolin]

[QUOTE=Bruce Clausen;1652143 I remember using a book by Jerry Coker[/QUOTE]

@Bruce Clausen: was that book called Patterns For Jazz by Jerry Coker - Jimmy Casale - Gary Campbell - Jerry Green? if so, I've got it. one section in particular I really liked was 'Major Scale in Fourths'. here's the blurb that went with it.

Fourth intervals have become extremely popular among improvisers , in recent years, both because the interval interests them and because fourths tend to break away from the sound and rigid function of thirds heard in ordinary ruminations on chords built in thirds. Successive perfect fourth intervals will be discussed later as they are applied to "free form" improvisation. The following studies will help prepare the student to play general fourth intervals (sometimes perfect, sometimes augmented) as they are determined by the tones of major and minor scales.

anyhoo...I spent quite a bit of time on these patterns cuz I liked them, thought they sounded quite dynamic and somewhat 'outside'. I haven't revisited them for about a year and a half, but I think I could get it back if I put a couple of weeks into it.

[August Watters]

Mentioning Garrison Fewell reminds me of his guitar improv books. . . . Do you know if either of these covers what you refer to here as "using arpeggios as an organizing factor, with voice-leading to bring you to the next chord"? In any event, I will be looking forward to your book.

thanks, David

I can't speak about these books since I studied with Garrison way before he wrote them. I remember his previous book ("Jazz Improvisation"), but as I recall most of what I worked on was material in our lessons; at that time his book was just supplemental material. I can say though that Garrison Fewell was such a deep musician, both as performer and teacher -- if his sound interests you, you should just buy every book and recording he ever published and work through it -- it's the only way to understand what he has to offer.

I had looked at the melodic approach book at one point and I thought it looked interesting. I also remember thinking that it seemed pretty "harmonic", rather than "melodic",

In more recent years, I heard Garrison playing mostly in a free-jazz kind of style, where the focus was on motivic development, outside of harmonic structures. And yet as you've noticed, his process was still using arpeggios. I would expect that his "harmonic approach" book is probably key to understanding his "melodic approach" book. But again, I have not worked with these books.

[Bruce Clausen]

@Bruce Clausen: was that book called Patterns For Jazz by Jerry Coker - Jimmy Casale - Gary Campbell - Jerry Green? if so, I've got it. one section in particular I really liked was 'Major Scale in Fourths'.

BV: I remember that Patterns for Jazz book (and also Oliver Nelson's Patterns for Saxophone), but the one I used in teaching was a little handbook Coker wrote called Improvising Jazz. Good succinct text, with an appendix giving chord progressions of many standards, classed according to typical formal features. But their titles weren't given, so you had to listen well to figure out what tune you were playing. Here's a description I found on line:

"Improvising Jazz gives the beginning performer and the curious listener insights into the art of jazz improvisation. Jerry Coker, teacher and noted jazz saxophonist, explains the major concepts of jazz, including blues, harmony, swing, and the characteristic chord progressions."

For actual guitar instruction, I had most of my jazz students work through Lennie Niehaus' series Jazz Conception for Saxophone. Three volumes that get the student reading and playing typical jazz rhythms and phrases. Starts basic but gets up to some very hip material (for that era). You're playing complex chromatic melodies in complex rhythms, and getting good ideas for your own use in improvisation-- but no chords are given, so you have to figure out by careful analysis what the implied chord progression is for each study. A great workout.

It's over 30 years since I looked at any jazz teaching material, but those are some highlights I remember. There must be better choices now, but I wouldn't know them.

And yeah, stacks of fourths were almost a new discovery back around 1960, for constructing chords and melodies both. Players like Bill Evans, Herbie Hancock, John Coltrane, tunes like So What, Maiden Voyage, Freedom Jazz Dance. There's a hint of Hindemith there.