Bensons approach to playing changes.

[KRosser]

Ken, you edited your post and added this after I responded.


Yeah, sometimes it takes me a couple passes....I'm not a great typist so my brain goes much faster than my fingers and I miss stuff. Then I have to go back and fix the spelling because I feel if you constantly misspell things people are apt to take you less seriously - it doesn't seem to matter much on the internet but it's just a bugaboo of mine I guess.

Theory on guitar? I did not know theory was instrument dependent. I just learned something!

Tag - this was merely a reference to this:


The F Maj IS a whole step away on my guitar, is it on yours? If not, please explain.


In terms of how the harmonic function is derived (which is what the poster was referring to), subdominant and dominant are not a whole step apart, even though "that's the way they appear on your instrument".

I was merely trying to explain why that is.

A lot of times people who learn theory with a guitar in their hands to understand it get confused by this.

My apologies if that was misdirected.

[zoooombiex]

Ken, you edited your post and added this after I responded.

Now you are taking the chords OUT of the context of the example it was given in. Now the G obviously is the tonic chord. As a matter of fact, this is a great example of how I said any chord can act as the tonic chord! Its a matter of context of course. In the D7 blues, Gmaj 7 (subbed for A7) acts as a dom chord pulling your ear back to the D7. But you knew that right? ;)

Thats like taking an A minor chord and saying what can you play over it? Well, it depends on where it is in the progression, right? If its the I-the III-the VI the II or whatever, it makes a big difference.

Theory on guitar? I did not know theory was instrument dependent. I just learned something!

I think you missed Ken's point:

I was merely pointing out either the theory won't work (which it will) or your terminology is all mixed up (which, I believe, is the case)"dominant" already has a defined meaning. it's not just "harmonically unstable" - it means pulling back to the 1 (or more generally, a chord whose root is a fifth above another).

so in Ken's example of Dmaj7 -> G, there is only one "dominant". it doesn't go both ways.

by calling all the unstable chords "dominant" you are blurring the nature of each chord. to use a stupid analogy, if you're standing at the north pole and start walking, you're gonna head "south" but that doesn't tell you much about where you're headed. so maybe using different terms than tonic/dominant would be more clear.


...at least I think that's what he was getting at. a legitimate point in any event...

[Tag]

Thanks. What about the Miles quote?

In his autobiography. Another great book, with some real surprises.

[Tag]

So, in other words...there's no ONE thing to use, as in only the Tonic and Dominant idea? I find that to be very true.

Absolutely. Show me ANYWHERE where I said it is the only approach. There are an infinite ways I would think. Maybe you did not read the title of the thread?? BENSONS method, not THE ONLY METHOD. Not sure why you would think that. That being said, there are only two sounds. Tonic or dominant, so may as well go with it IMO.

:BEER

[hangten]

:horse

[Tag]

Yeah, sometimes it takes me a couple passes....I'm not a great typist so my brain goes much faster than my fingers and I miss stuff. Then I have to go back and fix the spelling because I feel if you constantly misspell things people are apt to take you less seriously - it doesn't seem to matter much on the internet but it's just a bugaboo of mine I guess.



Tag - this was merely a reference to this:



In terms of how the harmonic function is derived (which is what the poster was referring to), subdominant and dominant are not a whole step apart, even though "that's the way they appear on your instrument".

I was merely trying to explain why that is.

A lot of times people who learn theory with a guitar in their hands to understand it get confused by this.

My apologies if that was misdirected.

Thanks for the clarification Ken, and I should follow you on the spelling thing, as you have noticed, I spend to much time on here to bother with that however. ;) Part of the reason my posts sound so blunt is that I try and type as little as possible, so try and get straight to the point.

Is this what you are referring to?

http://www.jimloy.com/physics/scale.htm

Yea, I understand the temperment a little bit, but since our instruments are tempered, IMO, it does not matter. Its a whole step apart on the guitar, piano and whatever, so thats how we use it. If they are not a whole step apart on the pianos or guitars you play, please explain. Otherwise, lets deal with what we actually use.

[Aj_rocker]

ok, im gonna say this ONCE, you do reliase your arguging with one of the WORLDS best guitar teachers do you?? and that only one person your fighting with. Personally i perfer to think of a melody like miles or parker. I think people like wes said more than vai. i know its subjective but i perfer the use of a few clever little tricks like using diminished arpeggio on the five chord when moving to the one.

anyway just my method


Aj

[Aj_rocker]

also i know he isn't jazz but how does Lukather play soo melodically over hard changes?

Aj

[lalaland]

That being said, there are only two sounds. Tonic or dominant, so may as well go with it IMO.

:BEER

That being said, there's only two sounds. Major triads and minor triads.

:NUTS

Jamie

[zoooombiex]

That being said, there's only two sounds. Major triads and minor triads.

:NUTS

Jamie

Don't be ridiculous. The only two types of sounds are the right ones and wrong ones.

:messedup

[zoooombiex]

Yea, I understand the temperment a little bit, but since our instruments are tempered, IMO, it does not matter. Its a whole step apart on the guitar, piano and whatever, so thats how we use it. If they are not a whole step apart on the pianos or guitars you play, please explain. Otherwise, lets deal with what we actually use.


the point here is that what gives a subdominant its function is not the fact that it is a whole step away from the dominant within a scale, but the fact that the subdominant and dominant are equally centered around the tonic. the subdom is a 5th below the tonic, the dom is a 5th above. that is why a subdom functions the way it does. it balances the dominant around the tonic. the fact that it is a whole step away from the dom when octave-reduced is merely incidental.

[Clifford-D]

Thanks for the clarification Ken, and I should follow you on the spelling thing, as you have noticed, I spend to much time on here to bother with that however. ;) Part of the reason my posts sound so blunt is that I try and type as little as possible, so try and get straight to the point.

Is this what you are referring to?

http://www.jimloy.com/physics/scale.htm

Yea, I understand the temperment a little bit, but since our instruments are tempered, IMO, it does not matter. Its a whole step apart on the guitar, piano and whatever, so thats how we use it. If they are not a whole step apart on the pianos or guitars you play, please explain. Otherwise, lets deal with what we actually use.
They are rendered a whole step apart, after they are generated.
And octave reduction takes place.

[Tag]

I think you missed Ken's point:

"dominant" already has a defined meaning. it's not just "harmonically unstable" - it means pulling back to the 1 (or more generally, a chord whose root is a fifth above another).

so in Ken's example of Dmaj7 -> G, there is only one "dominant". it doesn't go both ways.

by calling all the unstable chords "dominant" you are blurring the nature of each chord. to use a stupid analogy, if you're standing at the north pole and start walking, you're gonna head "south" but that doesn't tell you much about where you're headed. so maybe using different terms than tonic/dominant would be more clear.


...at least I think that's what he was getting at. a legitimate point in any event...

Which is why you have to know where you are going. ;) Take things out of context, and they are meaningless. (Which is what ken did.) That was my point.

[Clifford-D]

Which is how they are on the instruments we play. ;)
As a result of octave reduction, jeez dude, you are so stubborn.

No one is arguing the F note is a whole step away from G

Just the generation of the F note. Zoooooooom said it well.

I thought I had???

[Tag]

As a result of octave reduction, jeez dude, you are so stubborn.

No one is arguing the F note is a whole step away from G

Just the generation of the F note. Zoooooooom said it well.

I thought I had???


My point is they both pull your ear back and are subbed for one another all the time in jazz. Whats the big deal? F maj is played all the time over G7. They both pull your ear back to the tonic area. Stubborn? You guys have tried every angle to find ways that this will not work, but no one has put up a system that has less limitations that I have seen. This system gives you every related sound, either away or at home, and shows how two different sounds can be used at the same time. What other method shows you can play a maj7 note on a Dom 7 chord as a ligitimate choice? What about an augmented scale over a diminished chord? Diminished scale over an augmented chord? There is a clip I have somewhere of Scott Lerner doing just this, and it worke PERFECTLY because his phrase is strong. (I think its wholetone over a diminished chord) All the notes are wrong, but it works perfectly. Why? because its just two dominant sounds pulling your ear back to the tonic area.

:dude

[Tag]

That being said, there's only two sounds. Major triads and minor triads.

:NUTS

Jamie

Go practice.

[zoooombiex]

MYou guys have tried every angle to find ways that this will not work, but no one has put up a system that has less limitations that I have seen.

Actually, to re-quote Ken

I was merely pointing out either the theory won't work (which it will) or your terminology is all mixed up (which, I believe, is the case)At least recently, no one has been saying the system doesn't "work." (5 points for what logical fallacy that illustrates). Many people have said they prefer not to use the system. Many have also criticized your inaccurate use of the terms "tonic" and "dominant."

I'm actually not sure what that would mean for the system to "not work." It just gives you options to use - take it or leave it. Some seem to arrive at those options differently, but that's not saying the system doesn't "work"

[heretic]

also i know he isn't jazz but how does Lukather play soo melodically over hard changes?

Aj

Steve Lukather has Dumbo ears...and growing up, he took lessons from Jimmy Wyble (great jazz gtr player) and took music classes at the now defunct Grove School of Music in the San Fernando Valley.

Regarding this whole thread: As others have said (but I am way too lazy to look back and find out who they are), it seems a lot of the arguing is over nomenclature, ie: tension/resolution vs. Dominant/Tonic.

If I could offer an opinion, I'd say that the Benson/Hart/Pass/Jones/Tag/etc...paradigm is a great shortcut when first approaching the art of jazz improvisation, as long as you realize:

- You have to be careful with your lines. A great ii/V phrase may not sound so badass over IV or vii -7b5, and is largely dependent of where the tune goes from there
- There is the temptation to rely on "pet phrases" which (to me) goes against the spirit of jazz improv (playing in the moment, for the moment).

If this sounds obvious to some of you, I apologize. Just hand me my "Firm Grasp" award on my way out...:jo

[lalaland]

Go practice.

Yes Mr. Tag.
In addition to classes, 5 hours yesterday.
No classes today, 2 hours so far.

Is that to your liking?

Dobby is just a humble servent, I seek only to do your will

Jamie

[lalaland]

What other method shows you can play a maj7 note on a Dom 7 chord as a ligitimate choice?


How about the friecking Bebop scale?

:jo

Jamie

[Tag]

[QUOTE]ok, im gonna say this ONCE, you do reliase your arguging with one of the WORLDS best guitar teachers do you??

Cool. And *I* think if he starts using this, he will be even better.:) Thats not a knock, as i would love to have a few lessons with Ken, a ton with Jack Zucker, and more than anyone, my old teacher Richie Hart who is very far away now. (Actually, I would love to hear Zucker and Hart play together. Both monster players in different ways.) The more we have talked in this thread, the beter and better I see this method as being. I did not realize how truly great it is!



Personally i perfer to think of a melody like miles or parker.

Who played like this.

i know its subjective but i perfer the use of a few clever little tricks like using diminished arpeggio on the five chord when moving to the one.

Which is included. Please read the thread.

[russ6100]

originally posted by heretic:
Regarding this whole thread: As others have said (but I am way too lazy to look back and find out who they are), it seems a lot of the arguing is over nomenclature, ie: tension/resolution vs. Dominant/Tonic.

If I could offer an opinion, I'd say that the Benson/Hart/Pass/Jones/Tag/etc...paradigm is a great shortcut when first approaching the art of jazz improvisation, as long as you realize:

- You have to be careful with your lines. A great ii/V phrase may not sound so badass over IV or vii -7b5, and is largely dependent of where the tune goes from there
- There is the temptation to rely on "pet phrases" which (to me) goes against the spirit of jazz improv (playing in the moment, for the moment).


Nicly summed up. :AOK

[russ6100]

originally posted by Tag:
Whats the big deal? F maj is played all the time over G7. They both pull your ear back to the tonic area.

When I'm playing an f major triad over G7, it's because it's one of the naturally generated triads built from the chord scale....

[Clifford-D]

Which is how they are on the instruments we play. ;)
Tag I'm pulling this straight out of Harmonic Experience by Mathieu.
Page 44.I hope it clears up some confusion.

"" The nature of the reciprocy between these two tones is found not only in their feelings
and in their sounds; it is also reflected in their numbers and names.
In the European nomenclature, the fifth above the tonic is called the dominant;
the fifth below is called the subdominant.
The name "subdominant" has been persistently misunderstood by generations of theory students:
Most musicians, even well educated ones,think that the subdominant is so named because
it is the fourth degree of its scale, just one degree below the dominant, which is the fifth degree.
It is true (alas) that the supertonic - the second degree of the scale -
is so named because it is one degree above the tonic. It is also true that
the subtonic - the seventh degree is one degree below the tonic. But
the nomenclature is, as usual, inconsistent.
The "sub" of subdominant actually refers not to its scaler position but to
its harmonic reciprocity.""

Here's a little more from Mathieu. pg 42

""Let me begin with something that may seem odd: The note we recognize as the
fourth degree of a major scale does not appear in the overtones series.
If the generating tone is C, then the F above it,
the perfect "fourth", never appears, not even if you ascend to the millionth
overtone. It's not there. Yet that note has been discovered in virtually every culture;
all human ears want it and find it... So if it isn't an overtone
What is it???""

It goes on to give the answer that has been repeated in many posts here.

This book is a facinating read. Coltranes teacher.

[Tag]

How about the friecking Bebop scale?

:jo

Jamie
Really a passing tone in that scale, and rarely used as a true note choice and tension against said 7 chord. Now look at B7 going to Emin in the key of C. (E min is the III chord, tonic to Cmaj7) That B7 chord gives you the F# note as a legit choice. (Maj7 of G7 going to C maj) Also, many early jazz playes came right out of the blues, so that F# note is just part of the parent blues scale! (The b5 of C in this case.)
VERY VERY GOOD! I need to start charging you.

[Tag]

Tag I'm pulling this straight out of Harmonic Experience by Mathieu.
Page 44.I hope it clears up some confusion.

"" The nature of the reciprocy between these two tones is found not only in their feelings
and in their sounds; it is also reflected in their numbers and names.
In the European nomenclature, the fifth above the tonic is called the dominant;
the fifth below is called the subdominant.
The name "subdominant" has been persistently misunderstood by generations of theory students:
Most musicians, even well educated ones,think that the subdominant is so named because
it is the fourth degree of its scale, just one degree below the dominant, which is the fifth degree.
It is true (alas) that the supertonic - the second degree of the scale -
is so named because it is one degree above the tonic. It is also true that
the subtonic - the seventh degree is one degree below the tonic. But
the nomenclature is, as usual, inconsistent.
The "sub" of subdominant actually refers not to its scaler position but to
its harmonic reciprocity.""

Here's a little more from Mathieu. pg 42

""Let me begin with something that may seem odd: The note we recognize as the
fourth degree of a major scale does not appear in the overtones series.
If the generating tone is C, then the F above it,
the perfect "fourth", never appears, not even if you ascend to the millionth
overtone. It's not there. Yet that note has been discovered in virtually every culture;
all human ears want it and find it... So if it isn't an overtone
What is it???""

It goes on to give the answer that has been repeated in many posts.

This book is a facinating read. Coltranes teacher.

Which is cool! So? Fmaj against C is played all the time as a G11 chord. As basic as it can be. What is your point? It works perfectly and is used in all the music we are talking about. Please be specific and use examples as to how you are trying to apply this to the music we are talking about, and playing over changes. Again, lets go to a basic blues in C. Give some examples.......

[Tag]

originally posted by Tag:


When I'm playing an f major triad over G7, it's because it's one of the naturally generated triads built from the chord scale....

It is. Its also the IV chord in the key, and is a dominant sounding chord which pulls your ear to a tonic area.

[lalaland]

Really a passing tone in that scale, and rarely used as a true note choice and tension against said 7 chord. Now look at B7 going to Emin in the key of C. (E min is the III chord, tonic to Cmaj7) That B7 chord gives you the F# note as a legit choice. (Maj7 of G7 going to C maj) Also, many early jazz playes came right out of the blues, so that F# note is just part of the parent blues scale! (The b5 of C in this case.)
VERY VERY GOOD! I need to start charging you.


Well it still gives you it huh?

Second of all, that resolution (B7 to Emin7) has been used in folk tunes for at least a hundred years before jazzers was around... (or Latin music).

Since when do you need a B7 to show you that an F# is a legit choice over a Cmaj7 chord. Or for that matter a G7 resolving to C

Jamie

[Tag]

If I could offer an opinion, I'd say that the Benson/Hart/Pass/Jones/Tag/etc...paradigm is a great shortcut when first approaching the art of jazz improvisation, as long as you realize:

- You have to be careful with your lines. A great ii/V phrase may not sound so badass over IV or vii -7b5, and is largely dependent of where the tune goes from there
- There is the temptation to rely on "pet phrases" which (to me) goes against the spirit of jazz improv (playing in the moment, for the moment).



Which is taste and the artists choice, and has ZERO to do with the system used. OK forget this system and go back to each individual chord. (Which is also included in this system. Lol!) Now you learn pet licks over each individual chord, except now you can only use them against THAT chord. UH OH!! Less choices! I just limited myself.

[zoooombiex]

Which is taste and the artists choice, and has ZERO to do with the system used. OK forget this system and go back to each individual chord. (Which is also included in this system. Lol!) Now you learn pet licks over each individual chord, except now you can only use them against THAT chord. UH OH!! Less choices! I just limited myself.

Heretic didn't say there was anything wrong with the system, he just pointed out two things to keep in mind as you use it. No need to argue with that.

Also, I'm don't think anyone has said you can ONLY play in the chord. (same fallacy as in a previous post, now 10 points). it's not like you are either using tag's system or you are forced to play in the chord. some people are just using a different approach that starts with the chord itself rather than whether the chord is at rest/unresolved (tonic/dom in your terms). both give you lots of options, but by a different method.

[Tag]

Well it still gives you it huh?

as I stated.

Second of all, that resolution (B7 to Emin7) has been used in folk tunes for at least a hundred years before jazzers was around... (or Latin music).

Have you heard it superimposed over a G7 to Cmaj progression, or just as another part of the song?

Since when do you need a B7 to show you that an F# is a legit choice over a Cmaj7 chord.


Never. go back and read.




Or for that matter a G7 resolving to C

Rarely taught. Go google it like everything else you are doing, and see what you can find.

[Tag]

Heretic didn't say there was anything wrong with the system, he just pointed out two things to keep in mind as you use it. No need to argue with that.

And I said you have to keep that in mind with ANY system.

Also, I'm don't think anyone has said you can ONLY play in the chord. (same fallacy as in a previous post, now 10 points). they are just using a different approach that starts with the chord itself rather than whether the chord is at rest/unresolved (tonic/dom in your terms).

Cool. And how do you find alternate sounds to use in these systems over said chords? Guess work? Trial and error?

[Clifford-D]

Um, I was talking about generation of the fourth.

Is your question to me "how is a fourth used in blues"

I wasn't talking about using the note in a scheme like blues.

That's a silly question and you missed what Mathieu is saying.

Tag, are you in agreement with Mathieu about how the fourth is generated??? (created) How it's an undertone. and all that??

You have not answered this question.

Because I'm seeing a pattern of selective answering of posts. You answer the ones that only support your argument. Maybe you cross the line
if you said Mathieu is wrong. That would certainly generate a responce.

[heretic]

Which is taste and the artists choice, and has ZERO to do with the system used.

Of course, we agree on this.

But it also shows that "Tonic/Dominant are the only 2 sounds" as a system, is not sufficient, since you also have to account for taste and the artist choice. (Before you beat me to it, neither is any other system/method).
I don't think you believe that either, but you are so gung-ho in how you present this, somebody could just take it to mean "oh goody! Tonic/Dominant! I'm set! Benson, watch out, here I come!", when there is so much more to consider...

[Bussman]

...The more we have talked in this thread, the beter and better I see this method as being. I did not realize how truly great it is!
...

Ha, I realized the first time I read this thread that the person you were trying to convince was really yourself. It only took 3 years and 30 some odd pages but I'm sure it was well worth it.

[Clifford-D]

Ha, I realized the first time I read this thread that the person you were trying to convince was really yourself. It only took 3 years and 30 some odd pages but I'm sure it was well worth it.
At the expence of all the burned bridges and cindered bodies.

[azgolfer]

"Tonic/Dominant are the only 2 sounds"
It's not that, it's that you can group all the sounds together into those two groups. The system can simplify, but it also gives you more to choose from, especially over the II and IV chords. For instance, I tried playing a line I use over Dm7b5 to G7b9 in "Blue Bossa" over the Fm chord and it sounds good. I would never have thought of this before.

[Clifford-D]

It's not that, it's that you can group all the sounds together into those two groups. The system can simplify, but it also gives you more to choose from, especially over the II and IV chords. For instance, I tried playing a line I use over Dm7b5 to G7b9 in "Blue Bossa" over the Fm chord and it sounds good. I would never have thought of this before.
You must concider the Bass/root movement. Because I don't get the IV hit as you say, If I strictly play Dm7b5 - G7 to replace the Fm7.
The Dm7b5 - G7 has its place in that tune later a couple bars.
As far as soloing, all notes are available always. That's why your notes worked.
Crash and burn, imo.

[heretic]

It's not that, it's that you can group all the sounds together into those two groups. The system can simplify, but it also gives you more to choose from, especially over the II and IV chords. For instance, I tried playing a line I use over Dm7b5 to G7b9 in "Blue Bossa" over the Fm chord and it sounds good. I would never have thought of this before.

Yeah, I dig it. But this is an example where "you have to be careful". G7b9 has a B, whereas Fm has a C. If you can hear the color of that B over the F minor, and this is a sound you are going for, and you can phrase it so it doesn't end up sounding a little sour, then wa-wa-wee-wa Borat, go for it! (all of that can be summed up in Tag's words "taste and artist choice"). The system of reducing all the sounds into 2 groups can lead someone to gloss over these little details.

[garyh]

I haven't read all 37 pages (so far) of this so maybe this has been said before; but to me the simpler approach and more obvious is that these chords are all built off the C major scale and therefore, that scale will fit all the chords. The D Dorian is just the C major scale. Perhaps I'm missing something here but then knowledge of the arpeggios (chord tones) will guide your playing within that diatonic scale and progression.

What is more interesting is how to handle key changes within the progression (non-diatonic chords). This sounds too simple so I must be missing the point here. Nevermind.

[azgolfer]

"you have to be careful".
You must concider the Bass/root movement.

Actually, if it sounds good, that's all I really need (or want) to know.

Another level of this might be that each player has an opinion on what sounds good, and if you get used to this tension/resolution idea you might come to not only like it, but expect it. I read in an interview that Wes and Coltrane got together for awhile, and they weren't sure it was going to work, because they had different conceptions of chords and harmony.

[Tag]

Um, I was talking about generation of the fourth.

Is your question to me "how is a fourth used in blues"

I wasn't talking about using the note in a scheme like blues.

That's a silly question and you missed what Mathieu is saying.

Tag, are you in agreement with Mathieu about how the fourth is generated??? (created) How it's an undertone. and all that??

You have not answered this question.

Because I'm seeing a pattern of selective answering of posts. You answer the ones that only support your argument. Maybe you cross the line
if you said Mathieu is wrong. That would certainly generate a responce.

Which questions do NOT support my system that I am not answering? I am answering every one of them. I do not understand what you are trying to point out in what Mathieu is saying. The fourth of the key is the flated 7th of a Dom 7 chord which is the chords we play. So?? What is your question, and how is it relevant to playing on changes? Are you trying to get into how the diatonic scale was created? Maybe start another thread? I am dealing with playing on the chords we use everyday. Please read the title of the thread.

[Tag]

Of course, we agree on this.

But it also shows that "Tonic/Dominant are the only 2 sounds" as a system, is not sufficient, since you also have to account for taste and the artist choice. (Before you beat me to it, neither is any other system/method).
I don't think you believe that either, but you are so gung-ho in how you present this, somebody could just take it to mean "oh goody! Tonic/Dominant! I'm set! Benson, watch out, here I come!", when there is so much more to consider...


OK, then we are in agreement. this system will not make you a great jazz player! It only supplies many (most) of the harmonic tools used to get to be one.

:dude

[Tag]

Ha, I realized the first time I read this thread that the person you were trying to convince was really yourself. It only took 3 years and 30 some odd pages but I'm sure it was well worth it.


You betcha! I should have believed George, Wes and Coltrane to begin with! You KNOW I am hard headed though!

:dude

[Tag]

It's not that, it's that you can group all the sounds together into those two groups. The system can simplify, but it also gives you more to choose from, especially over the II and IV chords. For instance, I tried playing a line I use over Dm7b5 to G7b9 in "Blue Bossa" over the Fm chord and it sounds good. I would never have thought of this before.

Someone has gotten it, and started using it!!

Everyone in this thread is trying it now whether they say it or not.:D I can see all of their eyes going like this when they try it.:eek:
Wait until you start to get into it and digest it. Your playing is going to take MAJOR leaps both harmonically and melodically. Remember... At first, learn cliche jazz lines and use them over each area. This works REAL well because they spell out the impportant notes in the chords. As your ear adjusts, you will start playing things you never thought possible, because you will just hear it as moving away from the tonic, then moving back in. This is when you REALLY start to become a player. It takes time, but stick with it. I can promise you it will open your ear and move you ahead faster than any other method. :AOK After studying with two teachers who were great players, I felt like I was moving at a snails pace after a few years. I then switched teachers, and he made me UN LEARN everything I had spent all that time on. he told me the same thing. Take the time, re train your ear to hear it this way, and you will NEVER go back. he said i had to go backwards before I went forward, but then I would blow by where I would have been. I am forever greatful to him, because I hear and play at a level I did not think I could ever reach.

keep the real book next to you, and play the chords along with soloists like Stitt, parker, Brown, Benson, Wes, Byrd, Miles, rollins,Coltrane....all of those guys. learn the lines they are playing over each chord, and then start playing them over the others in that group. If you need help sometime, give me a call. It can get a bit tricky at first when you are converting to the relative minor. (playing in a minor key) It ends up being the exact same thing though.

VERY GOOD!! :AOK

[Tag]

I tried playing a line I use over Dm7b5 to G7b9 in "Blue Bossa" over the Fm chord and it sounds good. I would never have thought of this before.
Now reverse it!! use your F minor lines over theDm7b5 and G7!! I do it all the time. To sound a stronger resolution, play Fmin7 to G altered7, OR, just look at it as F minor, moving up a minor third to Abmin! (Abminor is the altered scale for G7, right?) DAMN, these guys are going to get good FAST. I better get practicing myself! :mad:

VERY VERY GOOD!!

[Tag]

I tried playing a line I use over Dm7b5 to G7b9 in "Blue Bossa" over the Fm chord and it sounds good. I would never have thought of this before.

Go farther now!!! Play F minor7 to Bb7 to Ebmaj7#11 over the D-7b5/G7b9/ C7minor. Wait until you hear that! YEEEEHAAAAA!!!!! You just took a HUGE step up! First chorus play the chords as written, second chorus play over these alternate changes. then start mixing all the sounds from the different groups! Its SICK!!! Do this mechanically until your ear just hears it. It will only take a few months at the MOST. :AOK
Here is another WICKED one!. Try F min7, up whole step to G7 up whole step to A-7b5 as your tonic sound!!! KILLER!!! Do it with chords as well to hear the sound. See how it helps your comping as well??? YEEEEHOOOOOOOO!!!!


SOMEBODY STOP ME!!!!!!!!!!! :AOK:AOK:AOK:AOK

[Tag]

Yeah, I dig it. But this is an example where "you have to be careful". G7b9 has a B, whereas Fm has a C. If you can hear the color of that B over the F minor, and this is a sound you are going for, and you can phrase it so it doesn't end up sounding a little sour, then wa-wa-wee-wa Borat, go for it! (all of that can be summed up in Tag's words "taste and artist choice"). The system of reducing all the sounds into 2 groups can lead someone to gloss over these little details.

Which is the 11 and b9 tensions! Both sound great to me! I just came up with a great line using them. If my recorder was hooked up Id post it.

[heretic]

They can sound great to me too! YEE-HAA !!! VERY GOOD, VERY GOOD !!!:jo But a B natural over an Fmin chord can sound awkward too, with the right phrasing, placement, rhythm and emphasis. Jes' sayin', iz all...

:dude

[Tag]

They can sound great to me too! YEE-HAA !!! VERY GOOD, VERY GOOD !!!:jo But a B natural over an Fmin chord can sound awkward too, with the right phrasing, placement, rhythm and emphasis. Jes' sayin', iz all...

:dude

cool! More bop lines and keep using the ear! The bop lines will guide you to the important tones and get your ear around. Lines lines lines. Licks do not work as well and sound more mechanical. they do not accent the proper notes most times, and do not bring out the function so much.

[DrSax]

lol. Tag, man, your enthusiasm is awesome. It makes me want to sell everything I own and follow you and your system :p You should do infomercials, you know, the ones where they sell their "get-rich-quick" methods in real estate or whatever. You'll be rich!

wait, i've seen your gear collection, you already ARE rich. Nice.

[Tag]

lol. Tag, man, your enthusiasm is awesome. It makes me want to sell everything I own and follow you and your system :p You should do infomercials, you know, the ones where they sell their "get-rich-quick" methods in real estate or whatever. You'll be rich!

wait, i've seen your gear collection, you already ARE rich. Nice.


Lol! Nope...ask scott lerner..he has been here....thats everything I own! My house is falling apart! :(

[Lucidology]

Lines lines lines. Licks do not work as well and sound more mechanical. they do not accent the proper notes most times, and do not bring out the function so much.

Tag ... finally I'm confused ...
Have understood everything everyone has been talking about here..
Until just now...
Have really enjoyed & appreciated all the interaction...
But I got pipe in with just one question ...?

What's the difference between "LICKS & LINES" ...?http://www.smileyhut.com/confused/dunno.gif

[JimmyD]

What's the difference between "LICKS & LINES" ...?http://www.smileyhut.com/confused/dunno.gif

I think of licks as stylized cliches of a particular idiom. Lines can be licks, but can also be thought and viewed as a "springboard" to go off in a myriad of directions. This was real evident to me when I spent time with Les Wise's Bebop Bible.

Jim

[Tag]

I think of licks as stylized cliches of a particular idiom. Lines can be licks, but can also be thought and viewed as a "springboard" to go off in a myriad of directions. This was real evident to me when I spent time with Les Wise's Bebop Bible.

Jim

Well stated. A line is just that. A melodic line, and most of the time it outlines the chord tones beautifully. Listen to Clifford Brown, a TOTAL master of them. parker, benson, Stitt, all those guys. very few licks, TONS of melodic lines.

[sergv]

OK, major tangent time:

While I can't say I knew Jerry anywhere near as well as Kimock - I wish I could - I did have one really amazing experience with him. He did a show at a club called Wolfgang's that used to be on Columbus in North Beach on your way up to the wharf and I was part of a duo that opened for him. It was with a singer/songwriter that did sort of a "Joni Mitchell abstraction with Chrissie Hynde attitude" - this would have been around '85, I think? We both played acoustic, she covered the basic chords and I did 'color commentary' but not really anything in the way of overt soloing. It was a very fun project for me.

Jerry was playing duo with John Kahn on bass. Going into it I didn't know much Dead stuff, but that which I'd heard sounded good. He and John did a long set of old-timey folk songs and blues tunes and I was really impressed with how well he did that stuff - authentically, with a real insider's knowledge of it, it felt like, a real genuine passion for that stuff.

Also - he was an incredibly sweet guy. I can't fathom for the life of me why anyone would have a bad word about him, based on my own brief encounter.

He died the day my wife and I got married - 8/9/95. Actually, we eloped - just went to the county courthouse, picked up a bottle of champagne and some Chinese food on the way home then called the families. I heard the news on that car radio on the way home. I told my wife Dianna my story about opening for him and we raised a glass in his honor.

I respected Jerry very deeply.

Great story, thanks for sharing. I would have loved to have seen/heard that show!

[Tag]

Here is a clip of MR PC totally using this method. Lots of lines with a few licks. Not to bad. http://www.soundclick.com/pro/view/02/default.cfm?bandID=121826&content=videos&vidID=16756

I think I only hit one unintended note, which is pretty good for me. :D

Lots of cool sounds though IMO, and I am a BABY in this system. :(

[rwe333]

Thanks...I love that band and that's a good record but I wish the recording quality was better. It was just direct to minidisc.

Did I ever share the story of the name "mo'tet"?

Bradford says "If you don't have much money, I can get you a quartet. If you have a little more I can get you a quintet. Even more, I can bring a sextet, septet, octet...and so on. The mo' money you have, the mo' "tet" you get".

Missed this before - wonderful!
...and nice work on that disc, mate.

[hear and play]

[quote=Tag;2935227]
It takes time, but stick with it. I can promise you it will open your ear and move you ahead faster than any other method. :AOK


Tag, I hope you're correct that the method is the best path, but, from what you've written previously, I don't think you can make that promise. The method helped you more than prior methods, but maybe your ear was just "ready" and other things would have worked as well. Also, what worked for you might not work as well for others. There's no "control group" for your experience.

I'm not dissin ya or saying that the method isn't the best tool. Rather, I'm saying that, regrettably, I haven't seen enough info to conclude that.

I wish teachers with wide experience in your method vs alternatives would opine. To my knowledge, the method is not a "primary" teaching tool at some of the major institutions (Berklee, GIT). Perhaps too few students have the ears for it? Perhaps it requires too much of the teacher? Perhaps the typical result is "plug it in" soloing -- that's not the method's fault, but that could be why it doesn't enjoy more prominence? Alternatively, perhaps it really is the way to go and academe has simply missed it.

Just tryin to keep it real.

[Tag]

[quote=Tag;2935227]
It takes time, but stick with it. I can promise you it will open your ear and move you ahead faster than any other method. :AOK


Tag, I hope you're correct that the method is the best path, but, from what you've written previously, I don't think you can make that promise. The method helped you more than prior methods, but maybe your ear was just "ready" and other things would have worked as well. Also, what worked for you might not work as well for others. There's no "control group" for your experience.

I'm not dissin ya or saying that the method isn't the best tool. Rather, I'm saying that, regrettably, I haven't seen enough info to conclude that.

I wish teachers with wide experience in your method vs alternatives would opine. To my knowledge, the method is not a "primary" teaching tool at some of the major institutions (Berklee, GIT). Perhaps too few students have the ears for it? Perhaps it requires too much of the teacher? Perhaps the typical result is "plug it in" soloing -- that's not the method's fault, but that could be why it doesn't enjoy more prominence? Alternatively, perhaps it really is the way to go and academe has simply missed it.

Just tryin to keep it real.

I hear you, and this is a great post. I have thought hard about it, but the fact that I had to UNLEARN things before I started to really learn them, IMO, shows that it was not just that my ear was ready. IMO and Ritchies, its just not a method that is really known all that well. He DOES teach this at Berklee now, and has taught it to his students since he learned it from George when he was around 21. If you ever want to really dig into georges playing, you will see this is EXACTLY how he approaches it, and IMO, PART of the reason he plays with such ease on changes compared to most other players. I have never heard anyone sound as great as george at so young an age. Uptown is just unreal, and as incredible as say Lagrene is, benson was MILES ahead at the same age. Thats hard to believe. (Of course just having a gift from God thet George has also helps!) I am hoping to make enough money where I can dedicate myself 100% to the guitar, and see how far I can get. This method is the one I will use for sure. I know now the sounds are in my head, and with a lot of hard work, I can get them out. I think with a lot of listening and using this method as a guide, many guys can become really good really fast. I know I improved as a player and a listener more in 1-2 years than I had in the previous 5-6 before I adopted this. What more could I ask for? Again, it is using this method, along with TRANSCRIBING as much as possible, and MAKING yourself USE it. A Real book and the masters playing those songs is an absolute MUST. You have to learn the lines over the chords, and see how they work and sound against the others in the groups. Also rememeber there are always exceptions, and a lot of in key blues licks that will throw you at times. That was a big step for me.

[hear and play]

[quote=hear and play;2936335]

I hear you, and this is a great post. I have thought hard about it, but the fact that I had to UNLEARN things before I started to really learn them, IMO, shows that it was not just that my ear was ready. IMO and Ritchies, its just not a method that is really known all that well. He DOES teach this at Berklee now, and has taught it to his students since he learned it from George when he was around 21. If you ever want to really dig into georges playing, you will see this is EXACTLY how he approaches it, and IMO, PART of the reason he plays with such ease on changes compared to most other players. I have never heard anyone sound as great as george at so young an age. Uptown is just unreal, and as incredible as say Lagrene is, benson was MILES ahead at the same age. Thats hard to believe. (Of course just having a gift from God thet George has also helps!) I am hoping to make enough money where I can dedicate myself 100% to the guitar, and see how far I can get. This method is the one I will use for sure. I know now the sounds are in my head, and with a lot of hard work, I can get them out. I think with a lot of listening and using this method as a guide, many guys can become really good really fast. I know I improved as a player and a listener more in 1-2 years than I had in the previous 5-6 before I adopted this. What more could I ask for? Again, it is using this method, along with TRANSCRIBING as much as possible, and MAKING yourself USE it. A Real book and the masters playing those songs is an absolute MUST. You have to learn the lines over the chords, and see how they work and sound against the others in the groups. Also rememeber there are always exceptions, and a lot of in key blues licks that will throw you at times. That was a big step for me.

If it works as well for others as it does for you, let's hope it becomes more widespread.

You're doing your part, huh?
:BEER

[mcuguitar]

Well, I'm reading these posts, and there is much good advice. Here's my 3 cents. My best friend grew up living right down the street from Benson. His name is Luther Dejarunett, and he lives in Pittsburgh. Luther is an excellent player, is on some of the original Jackson Five recordings, toured with Dionne Warwick, played with Sonny Rollins etc. etc. Luther used to go over to Benson's house, with about 3 other Pittsburgh guitar players. Benson taught them. Luther was my teacher for about a year, then we started gigging together and recording and doing day long jams at his apartment. Luther told me that Benson considered Wes Montgomery his musical "father". Pat Martino felt the same. WES MONTGOMERY is one of the biggest keys to understanding George, and I'd bet George himself would tell you the same. My background? Am I talking out my you know what? Well, I went to Berklee College of Music for a year, and I'm also a graduate of GIT. I've studied with Luther, Scott Henderson, John Hart (amazing player), Carl Verheyen (amazingest player), Norman Brown, Paul Gilbert, John Stohl, Bruce Foreman etc. and on and on. I've been around a bit. I hear all this talk about Berklee...but when I was there, it was a lame place for a guitarist. The music school section was splendid, but the guitar school, which is kind of separate... sucked...maybe that's why Mayer left, and so did Vai, oh yeah, and Metheny was only there a year too. Did you guys know that when Berklee invited Benson to play for the school around 1980 something, that they gave him all these charts, and tried to cause him a lot of grief on the bandstand. True story. Benson was pissed, but he blew them all away anyhow, because George can play. So much for Berklee. I find it really ironic that someone is teaching Benson's way up at Berklee. Oh well...times change...but it's a bit of a laugh for a place that was run by a lawyer. So study Parker if you want bop lines...he was the master after all, study Metheny for chord tones and melodic playing, and listen to Wes and George and Pat to learn how guitarists burn over bop. If you really want to know all the secrets...heck, move to N.Y. or Pittsburgh and seek out the real jazz players there. So many great players in each city. Oh yes...one more thing...Birelli Lagrene rocks, and I consider him up there with anyone. Peace, Jon.

[KRosser]

Thanks for the clarification Ken, and I should follow you on the spelling thing, as you have noticed, I spend to much time on here to bother with that however. ;) Part of the reason my posts sound so blunt is that I try and type as little as possible, so try and get straight to the point.

Is this what you are referring to?

http://www.jimloy.com/physics/scale.htm

Yea, I understand the temperment a little bit, but since our instruments are tempered, IMO, it does not matter. Its a whole step apart on the guitar, piano and whatever, so thats how we use it. If they are not a whole step apart on the pianos or guitars you play, please explain. Otherwise, lets deal with what we actually use.

No, that's not what I was referring to at all. I'm afraid I'm not much of a student of temperments, etc., not that there isn't some value to it. I still have too much to do and learn within the confines of equal temperment.

I'm talking , again, about how the terms 'dominant' and 'subdominant' and their functions were derived -

Let's take 'C' - G is called the dominant, it's a 5th higher. It resolves by lowering a 5th.

The interval of a 5th below C is called the 'subdominant' because it's a 5th below the tonic and resolves up a 5th, if that's where it's going. It's actually more common for the subdominant to lead away from the tonic.

Similarly, this is why the 3rd above is called the 'mediant' and the 3rd below (in other words, the 6th) is called the 'submediant'. Both the mediant and submediant imply motion.

The 2nd is the 'supertonic' and the 7th is the 'leading tone'. The leading tone is considered a strong dominant substitute.

If you're curious about this and more, Walter Piston's "Harmony" book is pretty much the university standard (still, I believe) and is easily available.


One more word about jazz chord subs -

OK, blues in C - start with C7. Subbing Gm7, Bbmaj7, Am7b5, Dm7, D7, F#m7b5, F#7, Eb7, A7, Cm7b5, Ab7, Bb7, Bbm7b5, C#mM7, etc. to me is not particularly tricky because that's all in just harmonizing the various scale applications. I don't like having to think of another chord than what I'm playing, so I justify all of these in terms of C (i.e., Dm7/C7 is C13sus4, C#mM7 is C7#5b9, Ab7 is C7b5#5#9). That stuff Coltrane used to do where he'd go C7-E7-G#7-C7-E7-G#7, etc, over this C7 chord? He got that from Nick Slonimsky. Do you know the Slonimsky 'Thesaurus of Scales'? You should. If this is your thing you'd like it. All those guys were working out of that in the 60's - Coltrane, Dolphy, Shorter, Hancock, etc

I like subbing Bmaj7 for the C7 because it gives you the b5 and #9 as well as both 7ths.

When I started assimilating these vocabulary sounds, I found it much easier to think of them as extensions off C than superimposed sequences. Many of the same sounds you're lusting after, at least as far as mainstream jazz playing goes. I just approach them differently in terms of how I look at them, and I try to connect everything via a common or neighbor tone, that way I don't have to worry about forcing any resolutions. If a tonic/dominant relationship is truly implied by the underlying harmony, it will take care of itself. It doesn't need any reinforcement from me.

I strongly suspect that's what most of the players you say in post-analysis are using this method are really doing (such as Parker, Coltrane, etc....).

That's one reason why I don't use 'everything is just tonic to dominant' in order to supplement progressions. One place I will sometimes use it is to simplify turnarounds at really fast tempos - that I find potentially useful.

Another more important reason is that I don't necessarily want everything to be harmony-driven. But that's a whole other discussion.

You asked for specific details on my 'method', there you have them. Not really a 'method' so much as just a way that I view that's worked for me throughout decades of playing gigs.

I watched your video - I've never seen or heard you play before. I think it's cool that you're excited about this, but really, you need to put this stuff in your back pocket and go out and scuffle through a couple thousand gigs in all kinds of settings if becoming a great jazz guitarist is really important to you.

Not that you asked for my advice - but there you have it anyway.

[George Benson]

Tag,

That tonic/dominant thing is just something I told Ritchie to get him off my ass.

You think that's how I play? Ha. My secret's safe.

peace,
GB

[shigihara]

I watched your video - I've never seen or heard you play before. I think it's cool that you're excited about this, but really, you need to put this stuff in your back pocket and go out and scuffle through a couple thousand gigs in all kinds of settings if becoming a great jazz guitarist is really important to you.

Not that you asked for my advice - but there you have it anyway.


well... i watched the video too... wow...amazing that this guy is lecturing everyone and as you said is not even halfway there yet himself...

[Leucadian]

Tag,

That tonic/dominant thing is just something I told Ritchie to get him off my ass.

You think that's how I play? Ha. My secret's safe.

peace,
GB

...hey George...Wes Montgomery here...welcome to the Gear Page...:D

[hangten]

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Benson http://www.thegearpage.net/board/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?p=2937094#post2937094)
Tag,

That tonic/dominant thing is just something I told Ritchie to get him off my ass.

You think that's how I play? Ha. My secret's safe.

peace,
GB


:eek:
the man himself has spoken.
does that mean this thread is over now?

:munch

[Tag]

[QUOTE]No, that's not what I was referring to at all. I'm afraid I'm not much of a student of temperments, etc., not that there isn't some value to it. I still have too much to do and learn within the confines of equal temperment.


Cool Ken, exactly my thoughts as well. Thanks for clarifying.


I'm talking , again, about how the terms 'dominant' and 'subdominant' and their functions were derived -

Let's take 'C' - G is called the dominant, it's a 5th higher. It resolves by lowering a 5th.

The interval of a 5th below C is called the 'subdominant' because it's a 5th below the tonic and resolves up a 5th, if that's where it's going. It's actually more common for the subdominant to lead away from the tonic.


No problems here either. And i agree the sub dom USUALLY leads to an even stronger Dominant. Typical example II-V or IV-V. But then you also have times when it does go back to tonic such as II-I or IV-I or whatever.

Again a thing I find very cool with this method is to play a STRONGER Dom sound over the II, and a MILDER over the V! That is not heard very much, and not used very much (if at all?) in other methods. This a great asset to this method and a typical Bensonism.


Similarly, this is why the 3rd above is called the 'mediant' and the 3rd below (in other words, the 6th) is called the 'submediant'. Both the mediant and submediant imply motion.

Just a different color of the tonic area, which is why pass and them said they treat both as the I. (NOT to say you just play the I major chord! All of the relative chords are interchangable here, so you are not "chord chasing", and you can actually color each chord differently. this is a HUGE benefit to just playing the I as a I, the VI as a VI, and the III as a III. It is ADDING different colors to each chord.

The 2nd is the 'supertonic' and the 7th is the 'leading tone'. The leading tone is considered a strong dominant substitute.

Agree. Strong dominant vs the II and IV which are milder dominant sounds.


If you're curious about this and more, Walter Piston's "Harmony" book is pretty much the university standard (still, I believe) and is easily available.


Understand it I ampretty sure.

One more word about jazz chord subs -

OK, blues in C - start with C7. Subbing Gm7, Bbmaj7, Am7b5, Dm7, D7, F#m7b5, F#7, Eb7, A7, Cm7b5, Ab7, Bb7, Bbm7b5, C#mM7, etc. to me is not particularly tricky because that's all in just harmonizing the various scale applications.

Of course, but the scales give you ALL the notes, and do not lead to motion in the lines as much. This is why melodic lines are so much better to play off of to me, and what I find in all of my transcribing. Very very few scales are ever played.




I don't like having to think of another chord than what I'm playing, so I justify all of these in terms of C (i.e., Dm7/C7 is C13sus4, C#mM7 is C7#5b9, Ab7 is C7b5#5#9).

I understand this, but IMO, this does not create the movement and "out" sounds nearly as well as using the various chords for motion. This is what I had to get away from. That system is also what led me to think all the notes had to "line up" all the time. Like using a diminished scale over a 13b 9 chord. then I would be transcribing something by benson or Coltrane or whoever, and i would hear a whole tone idea over a b9 chord and I would be like :confused::confused::confused::confused::confused: . Then I learned that it works because they are bot just dom sounds, pulling your ear back by a different route. Notes do NOT have to line up. The phrase is the important thing.






That stuff Coltrane used to do where he'd go C7-E7-G#7-C7-E7-G#7, etc, over this C7 chord? He got that from Nick Slonimsky. Do you know the Slonimsky 'Thesaurus of Scales'? You should. If this is your thing you'd like it. All those guys were working out of that in the 60's - Coltrane, Dolphy, Shorter, Hancock, etc


I have heard about it but never picked it up. If you think I will dig it, I will seek it out! :)


I like subbing Bmaj7 for the C7 because it gives you the b5 and #9 as well as both 7ths.

Thats a good one that sounds strange to my ear sometimes. I dig the 4th of that over C7 (Emaj7#11), as it gives a perfect 1/2 step resolution on every chord tone to the I. (Fmaj7)

When I started assimilating these vocabulary sounds, I found it much easier to think of them as extensions off C than superimposed sequences. Many of the same sounds you're lusting after, at least as far as mainstream jazz playing goes.

I hear you, and as you know, once your ear accepts the maj7 over the b7 on a dom chord, you realize that EVERY note can be used, in any order, which gives you every chord there is. I like the groupings of the chords because it spells out different movements, and is highly melodic even when way out. Again, IMO, it just gets you to that end point faster, and gives you boatloads of diffrent sounds, AGAINST the base chord, so you have two things going on at once.




I just approach them differently in terms of how I look at them, and I try to connect everything via a common or neighbor tone, that way I don't have to worry about forcing any resolutions. If a tonic/dominant relationship is truly implied by the underlying harmony, it will take care of itself.

When you play chord on chord, that is correct. But this is how I hear many of the guys you dig so much, and what bores my ear. Its one chord to the next, and you dont have that different movement that you hear instantly in guys like James Moody, Benson, etc. It really is a VERY different sound, that gives you many more options IMO.



I strongly suspect that's what most of the players you say in post-analysis are using this method are really doing (such as Parker, Coltrane, etc....).

From what benson passed on to Ritchie, the Dom Tonic thing is how they approached it. that is also what i hear, and it is verified when you transcribe them as opposed to say Scofield or Abercrombie. Stern has surprised me, as he seems to employ this a lot of times, although he is probably my least fave player of the above three. That is strictly personal taste though as i understand.

That's one reason why I don't use 'everything is just tonic to dominant' in order to supplement progressions. One place I will sometimes use it is to simplify turnarounds at really fast tempos - that I find potentially useful.

Well, I agree that is one place where it sure works, but I also see it the other way as I have explained.

Another more important reason is that I don't necessarily want everything to be harmony-driven. But that's a whole other discussion.

And we are in 100% agreement it should not be. This thread was about playing the changes though.

You asked for specific details on my 'method', there you have them. Not really a 'method' so much as just a way that I view that's worked for me throughout decades of playing gigs.

Understand, and any method that lets you express yourself is a great one. We have both found one that works for us, thank goodness!
:BEER

I watched your video - I've never seen or heard you play before. I think it's cool that you're excited about this, but really, you need to put this stuff in your back pocket and go out and scuffle through a couple thousand gigs in all kinds of settings if becoming a great jazz guitarist is really important to you.

Totally agree.

Not that you asked for my advice - but there you have it anyway.


Always glad to have it. Thanks! :)

[Tag]

Tag,

That tonic/dominant thing is just something I told Ritchie to get him off my ass.

You think that's how I play? Ha. My secret's safe.

peace,
GB




:(:(:(:(:(:(:(















LOL!! great post! :AOK

[Tag]

well... i watched the video too... wow...amazing that this guy is lecturing everyone and as you said is not even halfway there yet himself...


Thanks for listening. You are a much more polished player than I am for sure!


However, I actually dug my lines a lot more. :D



VERY GOOD VERY GOOD!!!

[Tag]

...hey George...Wes Montgomery here...welcome to the Gear Page...:D


DAMN!! Next thing you know, Joe Pass will stop by to say hello as well! This is the best thread ever! :D:D:D

[heretic]

:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

that's tension.

LOL!! great post! :AOK

that's resolution.

See Tag, you just LIVE the stuff! :dude

Seriously, I appreciate your being a good sport.

[Clifford-D]

:(:(:(:(:(:(:(















LOL!! great post! :AOK
It's a truth amungst many truths.

You still sound really good.

And as far as I'm concerned you are "there"

You always were.

:)

[Clifford-D]

Tag,

That tonic/dominant thing is just something I told Ritchie to get him off my ass.

You think that's how I play? Ha. My secret's safe.

peace,
GB
It's great to hear from you. I've always been into your music.
It's beautiful man.

This is a real honor chatting with you.

If I may be so bold, and this is what we do all the time here on TGP,,

Mr Benson, how do you do what you do my friend? or what is music for you as you play or just dream?

what fun..

peace, Cliff


:)

[Leucadian]

...Tag...I was watching one of your video's and noticed a pricetag hanging off the headstock of your guitar...is that why you call yourself Tag?:eek:

[gennation]

well... i watched the video too... wow...amazing that this guy is lecturing everyone and as you said is not even halfway there yet himself...

Where is this video. I guess I missed it in all the other text.

[Clifford-D]

...Tag...I was watching one of your video's and noticed a pricetag hanging off the headstock of your guitar...is that why you call yourself Tag?:eek:
I think it's more like 'tag your it',
you're now on the hotseat.

Fastest moving thread in a while.

[Tag]

Where is this video. I guess I missed it in all the other text.

Here... http://www.soundclick.com/pro/view/02/default.cfm?bandID=121826&content=videos&vidID=16756


Rip me apart as long as its your HONEST opinion. I feel anyone who is talking about this stuff should show that they at least "hear it." IMO, this shows I am. far from my best playing, but far from my worst as well.

Plenty of others at my soundclick site listed below.

[willhutch]

Hey Tag,

I'm intrested in your methodology. I admire your playing and would like to experiment with what you are suggesting.

You seem equipped to make recordings and videos. Any chance you could do a lesson clip to let us hear your method in action? I'm sure your approach is present throughout your clips. But maybe you could do a highly-focused, explicit segment where you show us how this works using simple examples. Maybe you use the chord progressions suggested in your OP?

This thread has ranged far and wide. It would be great if you could help those of us who are interested by providing audion examples. With all the hours you've put into this thread. An hour to record some examples seems justified.

Thanks for sharing.

[Tag]

Hey Tag,

I'm intrested in your methodology. I admire your playing and would like to experiment with what you are suggesting.

You seem equipped to make recordings and videos. Any chance you could do a lesson clip to let us hear your method in action? I'm sure your approach is present throughout your clips. But maybe you could do a highly-focused, explicit segment where you show us how this works using simple examples. Maybe you use the chord progressions suggested in your OP?

This thread has ranged far and wide. It would be great if you could help those of us who are interested by providing audion examples. With all the hours you've put into this thread. An hour to record some examples seems justified.

Thanks for sharing.


I will. Ill do something simple to just show how the different sounds work against the other chords in the goups. Its going to take me a few days, but Ill do something. There is one easy example I learned from benson that I want to show that really points this system out at a very basic level. It shows how it (method) gives you more options than others. I will play the exact line benson used over the backing II-V-I.

[shigihara]

Where is this video. I guess I missed it in all the other text.


http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showpost.php?p=2935949&postcount=563

[trap]

well... i watched the video too... wow...amazing that this guy is lecturing everyone and as you said is not even halfway there yet himself...

you are taking this way too seriously. and where is- there? tag seems like a good guy who is very very passionate about jazz guitar. god bless him!:dude

[shigihara]

you are taking this way too seriously.


really ?!?

as far as i remember that was my one and only post
in this thread...

i'll shut up 'n' play my guitar....

:D

[trap]

really ?!?

as far as i remember that was my one and only post
in this thread...

i'll shut up 'n' play my guitar....

:D

you are correct, it's just, that statement about his playing level struck me as a little judgemental. i can see debating with him about his theory but it should remain impersonal. obviously that statement originated with someone else and maybe he needs to step back as well. sorry if i offended you.

[shigihara]

but it should remain impersonal.


u must be joking...

try telling that tag guy...

personal attacks seem to be part of his 'style'...

[Tag]

u must be joking...

try telling that tag guy...

personal attacks seem to be part of his 'style'...


Hmmm. Since you seem intent on going there, maybe you should try this method! Maybe it would make your playing a little more interesting! Snooze fest city. Being polished and having lots of experience does not a creative player make. ;)

Now look... If you are hearing the music, it is only a matter of time put into the instrument to achieve higher levels. I have NEVER claimed to be more than an intermediate jazz player, but my ears are good. I argued with Lala land because he was NOT hearing anything other than key centered playing, as was shown in his clips. Even if he was at a beginning jazz level, it would have shown he could hear what he was talking about. he was googling his answers that could not be backed up in the LEAST by what he was hearing. Enough negativity.

[lalaland]

Hmmm. Since you seem intent on going there, maybe you should try this method! Maybe it would make your playing a little more interesting! Snooze fest city. Being polished and having lots of experience does not a creative player make. ;)



Are you kidding me? His fretless playing is nothing short of brilliant. His intonation is spot on perfect. His guitar sounds as beautiful as a sarangi. I have no idea how you could possibly insult this guy, he sounds amazing...
Check out 'Stella' on youtube. Wow. Beautiful harp harmonics.

Tag, as soon as I get back home, I'll record something for you - how about a little jazz blues, say Freddie Freeloader. Then you can tell me if I'm 'hearing' it.


BTW, was that really George Benson?

Jamie

[Tag]

[quote]
Are you kidding me? His fretless playing is nothing short of brilliant. His intonation is spot on perfect. His guitar sounds as beautiful as a sarangi. I have no idea how you could possibly insult this guy, he sounds amazing...
Check out 'Stella' on youtube. Wow. Beautiful harp harmonics.


Hey, he stated his honest opionion of me, I did the same. No hard feelings on my end! :)


Tag, as soon as I get back home, I'll record something for you - how about a little jazz blues, say Freddie Freeloader. Then you can tell me if I'm 'hearing' it.


How about the Blue Bossa backing I sent you?



BTW, was that really George Benson?


I thought it was someone joking around, but now I am wondering. Maybe someone hipped him to the thread? Would that be cool if it was or WHAT? :AOK If it was really him, I challenge him do a take to see if he is really hearing it as well. :D

JUST KIDDING GEORGE!!!


VERY GOOD VERY GOOD!!

[Tag]

A buddy of mine and great jazz guitarist....Russ Difilippis......

"My experiences at Berklee were some of the best times of my life. I was surrounded with wonderful fellow students, who are now the "who's who" of the guitar community. John Scofield, Mike Stern, my close buddy Richie Hart a.k.a Richie Hohenburger, Jeff Golub,Chuck Loeb, Jamie Glazer ,Jay Azzolia and the late Emily Remler. We were all walking the halls trying to get our chops together. During my years at Berklee I had the good fortune to study with three very dedicated but distinctively different guitar instructors. The first was Mark French who had patience, helping me navigate through the requirements to earn my Bachelors of Music In Applied Performance. Mark also has a gift for making students think out of the box. I recall a lesson when he asked me to get out my Berklee Modern Method for Guitar Book One, which I had been through extensively years early and was sure I was thoroughly done with. But when he asked me to turn to the reading study on page 64-64 and turn the book literally upside down and read it, I knew that you are never really done with anything as long as you keep thinking out of the box. So what I was face to face with was now middle C had become A first ledger line above the staff. And if you were to super impose a different key signature, well now that's a horse of a completely different color. Heck of a great drill! Mick Goodrick on the other hand had a different approach. More of a Zen master. He also had the gift of patience, but he would like to plant the seeds of creativity and let you reap the harvest if you tended to the field properly. For instance I once asked him how might I comp bass lines and changes like a piano player would. His response was "guide tones" and sent me on my way. I went back to my dorm room and contemplated that, trying all different things til I made some wonderful discoveries. Now the grand dad of the Berklee experience was William Leavitt, who I affectionately and respectfully called Uncle Bill. His organization and guidance not only helped me but helped all of us who went through his system. He helped us rise to the highest level of proficiency and professionalism. His educational contribution definitely lifted the integrity of guitar in today's landscape. You can witness his dedication by the volume of educational materials he had published.youruences on jazz guitar when you were beginning? And have they stayed the same or have thnon-guitare, how has this experience influenced you professionally and personally?


RD: Big bad George Benson has been a guitar hero since I was in my early teens.When I was attending Berklee I would go see him at the Jazz Workshop a jazz club on Boylston St.Like all of the young Berklee guitar players I was mezmorized with his playing, he's a natural. He hears it and plays it. After I graduated I came back to the New York area and moved back to my home town of Fort Lee N.J. At that time G.B. moved to a neighboring town and we started running into each other at music stores and restaurants. In the late 80's George's son Robert (sax player) was getting ready to attend Berklee. George was told by the school to contact me so I could get Robert ready for his admittance to the school. So G.B.gave me a call,came by my place and we set up Robert to have 2 lessons per week with me. With all this intense study Robert was able to get himself advanced placement when he finally was enrolled in the school. It was during this time our families shared time together, hanging out, going for dinner, having parties and barbeques,etc. developing a treasured friendship. The Bensons will always be part of my extended family. Earlier I mentioned my wonderful experience working along George as his assistant but as great as that was it pales in comparison to sitting across from him on the living room couch playing guitar together. Just when you think you've heard everything. BAM!!!! he kicks it up a notch. He is BAD!!!!"

:AOK:AOK:AOK:AOK:AOK

[gennation]

Hmmm. Since you seem intent on going there, maybe you should try this method! Maybe it would make your playing a little more interesting! Snooze fest city. Being polished and having lots of experience does not a creative player make. ;)

Now look... If you are hearing the music, it is only a matter of time put into the instrument to achieve higher levels. I have NEVER claimed to be more than an intermediate jazz player, but my ears are good. I argued with Lala land because he was NOT hearing anything other than key centered playing, as was shown in his clips. Even if he was at a beginning jazz level, it would have shown he could hear what he was talking about. he was googling his answers that could not be backed up in the LEAST by what he was hearing. Enough negativity.

As if we'd expect anything less of you Tag. That's pretty sad.

You have two sounds and your playing and shows it...and here the legitimate reason why...

Have you noticed by listening to Kimock or Shig (I haven't heard Ken) that if anything they can build a solo from beginning to end? Their solo's grow as they are playing them. That's always impresses me with those guys is it's like they know how to feel their way into a solo and then grow it from letters to words to sentences to a whole story. Maybe it's the fact that 1000's of people are clapping for the soloist that went before them and they don't want to waste any great licks that will get drowned out ;) But, they certainly feel their way into a solo.

Having watched your video you're playing ends pretty much right where it started. There's no "growing up" in your solo.

There's plenty of vid's of those guys that you can check out, but maybe you ought to stop listening to others and take a serious listen to yourself. Maybe it's the "two sound" approach but, you aren't able to take your solo (the one in the video) to the next step...you seem to be stuck in the same sound throughout the whole solo.

If you listen to Coltrane and Benson, they can shoot fire right off the bat...and can still turn that heat up and up to make a 3 minute solo worth listening to, and precious. You may have copped some of their licks, but you need to look further for momentum.

Try this...watch the first half of your solo, see how far it progressed, then watch the second half...did it progress ANY further? I think you'll hear the same thing I did...actually it's the same everything, style, vibe, mood, intensity, call and response...it's the same everything...after about one minute in...you've said everything you have to say.

Constructively criticizing...that's a huge difference in Steve and Shig's playing over yours, a seriously huge difference.

Hmmm, maybe they have more than two sounds???

[shigihara]

personal attacks seem to be part of his 'style'...


and once again... as proven above...

[shigihara]

well... i watched the video too... wow...amazing that this guy is lecturing everyone and as you said is not even halfway there yet himself...


let me re-quote myself here...

my only comment re:tag was just stating the obvious:
agreeing w/ken that tag is an intermediate improvisor
who has his 'work' cut out for him if he wants to master
that one particular musical 'language' so well spoken by people
such as GB...

[andyland6]

I started applying these concepts last night...and they seem to work really well for me.

I'm only on the first post, but theres a hell of a LOT of info in the post.

Good job Tag. Thanks. Don't go changin.
AAB

[Clifford-D]

Hmmm. Since you seem intent on going there, maybe you should try this method! Maybe it would make your playing a little more interesting! Snooze fest city. Being polished and having lots of experience does not a creative player make. ;)

Now look... If you are hearing the music, it is only a matter of time put into the instrument to achieve higher levels. I have NEVER claimed to be more than an intermediate jazz player, but my ears are good. I argued with Lala land because he was NOT hearing anything other than key centered playing, as was shown in his clips. Even if he was at a beginning jazz level, it would have shown he could hear what he was talking about. he was googling his answers that could not be backed up in the LEAST by what he was hearing. Enough negativity.
Even after GB chimes in you can't be cool and let it go. On with the attacks.

Post GB you are now attacking Paul Shigihara.

This post is so big because people are left stupified
by what comes out your mouth. Like rubberneckers at an accident.

The meanest cut you made was to Kimock, imo, it's really hard to say,
there were so many put downs. But Steve didn't deserve the crap you slung at him.
He can play circles around you.

Like you are so much more developed, in your wildest dreams.

Your playing is good, your attitude sucks big time.
You just might have blew all the credibility you had.

I'm surprised you haven't put down GB himself for not aggreeing with you.
maybe you sent him a pm telling him to stick it. That would be your style.

You had a chance to have a fertile thread, but,,,

I think Dr Phil is in order.

[KRosser]

let me re-quote myself here...

my only comment re:tag was just stating the obvious:
agreeing w/ken that tag is an intermediate improvisor
who has his 'work' cut out for him if he wants to master
that one particular musical 'language' so well spoken by people
such as GB...

Just to clarify -

I made no judgements about Tag's playing at all or the state of his development.

I merely offered him some advice to improve his playing, which was not meant facetiously at all (also - splatt's advice about the 'time' thing? - right on the money) but meant constructively and as sort of an olive branch, since Tag has taken on a confrontational position with me on this whole thread which I don't really understand since I've never said he was wrong or bad or anything - just that I didn't do it or teach it.

Comments like he made about your playing, however, make me wonder if olive branches will be seen as such.

[Tag]

As if we'd expect anything less of you Tag. That's pretty sad.

You have two sounds and your playing and shows it...and here the legitimate reason why...

Have you noticed by listening to Kimock or Shig (I haven't heard Ken) that if anything they can build a solo from beginning to end? Their solo's grow as they are playing them. That's always impresses me with those guys is it's like they know how to feel their way into a solo and then grow it from letters to words to sentences to a whole story. Maybe it's the fact that 1000's of people are clapping for the soloist that went before them and they don't want to waste any great licks that will get drowned out ;) But, they certainly feel their way into a solo.

Having watched your video you're playing ends pretty much right where it started. There's no "growing up" in your solo.

:jo Those videos are just of me practicing, most never even meant to be posted, I just did for the fun of it.
Here are some where I am actually "playing" and not just practicing. Plenty here for your listening pleasure. :D Sit back, grab an ice tea and enjoy! I actually like the 2 different approaches on Blue bossa. You also miss the fact that there ARE only two sounds, regardless of who is playing. Its either at reast or its not. Yea, I play all of the "subdominant" sounds too. Maybe your ear cant pick them out? :p


By the way, Shig comes in for ONE post, knocks my playing (which is fine), and no one says a thing. then when I give my honest opinion on him, a few guys think I am being negative? Hey, you put out what you think of someones playing, be ready to take it back baby! I always keep my link up there so any can hear me play. If the guy knocked my socks off and said he hated my playing, I would still say he knocked my socks off! What are you going to do? there are always guys who are better, until you get to benson! Lol!

http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=994053&q=hi (http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=994053&q=hi)


http://www.soundclick.com/util/getp...id=1343307&q=hi (http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=1343307&q=hi)


http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=3216711&q=hi (http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=3216711&q=hi)


http://www.soundclick.com/util/getp...id=3094418&q=hi (http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=3094418&q=hi)


http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=1664999&q=hi (http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=1664999&q=hi)

http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=1396695&q=hi (http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=1396695&q=hi)


http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=1303485&q=hi (http://www.soundclick.com/util/getplayer.m3u?id=1303485&q=hi)


VERY GOOD VERY GOOD!!!!

[trap]

[QUOTE=splatt;2939822]real music is really, really serious.
really, really serious fun, too,
but: still serious as cancer, friend.

sorry, it's not as serious as cancer. ever have it? hope you never do. and look, it's obvious that paul s is a great player, as are you. i guess my question is, why would you get into a serious discussion with tag to begin with? nothing stated here as theory is that important in the scheme of things. going head to head is fine to a point, but when it becomes obvious that your dealing with someone who will not listen, well, to quote paul shig, time to go play my guitar.:RoCkIn

[Tag]

Just to clarify -

I made no judgements about Tag's playing at all or the state of his development.

I merely offered him some advice to improve his playing, which was not meant facetiously at all (also - splatt's advice about the 'time' thing? - right on the money) but meant constructively and as sort of an olive branch, since Tag has taken on a confrontational position with me on this whole thread which I don't really understand since I've never said he was wrong or bad or anything - just that I didn't do it or teach it.

Comments like he made about your playing, however, make me wonder if olive branches will be seen as such.

Of course Ken. Thanks for the constructive criticism! very much appreciated!, and I agree with you. The other clips where I am actually playing and not practicing are much better IMO, but lack of playing time effects my sense of time for sure. That is my #one goal as soon as I get back to it!
:BEER

:BEER

[Tag]

Post GB you are now attacking Paul Shigihara.

Not at all. I posted my honest opinion of his playing, like he did of mine.

[QUOTE]
This post is so big because people are left stupified
by what comes out your mouth. Like rubberneckers at an accident.


So you are a rubbernecker?



The meanest cut you made was to Kimock, imo, it's really hard to say,
there were so many put downs. But Steve didn't deserve the crap you slung at him.


You ignore the fact he came in and ripped me first?


He can play circles around you.

HAH!!!!


Your playing is good, your attitude sucks big time.

Hmm...my attitude is to not talk behind others backs, and to be 100% honest.


You just might have blew all the credibility you had.

Ignore list me then!


I'm surprised you haven't put down GB himself for not aggreeing with you.
maybe you sent him a pm telling him to stick it. That would be your style.


I would never do that to anyone. Sounds like you would though.


You had a chance to have a fertile thread,

Hmmm.....from all the emails and my PM box being filled several times with questions about this system, and how its already working for so many, it seems maybe it is??



:AOK

[Tag]

I started applying these concepts last night...and they seem to work really well for me.

I'm only on the first post, but theres a hell of a LOT of info in the post.

Good job Tag. Thanks. Don't go changin.
AAB

VERY GOOD VERY GOOD!!! :BEER

[Tag]

tag,
i'm not dissing you, here, but offering a wee small suggestion:
try to stop that tapping-yer-foot "in time" thing.
i suspect it's getting in the way of your feeling time
in the larger middle of your body,
where it might wanna belong (in your case):
maybe it's mucking up your rhythm, blocking the introduction of your personal, natural feel into your phrasing?
as it appears to me now,
it sounds kinda all "eyeballs" & "foot",
not necessarily the parts of one's body one delegates
as the prime-motivators-of & most-responsible-parties-for one's musical phrasing.

pulse, blood:
heart.
middle of the body.
solar plexus.
stomach.
balls.
ass.

just a thought, no more.

dt / spltrcl


Thanks Dave! The foot tapping is probably a leftover from my disco days!
:o

[KRosser]

Of course Ken. Thanks for the constructive criticism! very much appreciated!, and I agree with you. The other clips where I am actually playing and not practicing are much better IMO, but lack of playing time effects my sense of time for sure. That is my #one goal as soon as I get back to it


How much do you spend playing with other humans?

(By the way, I don't think Shig was 'knocking your playing' at all. I think he was knocking your hubris, which can get pretty tiring sometimes. He stated you were an intermediate level player, which I don't disagree with.
FWIW, I happen to like and respect Shig's playing a great deal - did you hear those duets with Mariano? I loved those. There is a depth of maturity and command there that only a lot of experience can get you, not to mention rich imagination and a great team-playing spirit)

I listened to a few of those tracks. I won't be so presumptuous as to assume you want specific direction from me, but again, to elaborate on my general advice - if you want to expand you have to play with lots of people and it at least sounds to me like you don't. Practicing to these tracks is cool - I do it every so often as well - but it's like sparring with a punching bag. Yes, every great boxer does it and every great boxer can hit the bejesus out of a punching bag, but NO boxer will tell you it's a substitute for what you learn in a real fight. It's 'the things you learn in a real fight' that I don't hear.

[lalaland]

Having watched your video you're playing ends pretty much right where it started. There's no "growing up" in your solo.
I think thats an effect of playing with a backing track. I think anyone who plays only with backing tracks for a long time will have that same effect. IMHO.


You ignore the fact he came in and ripped me first?


He kind of said that it was good advice to a point, but that it could be taken further. Didn't really seem to insult you or your playing at all until you did.

However, this thread has inspired me to push my jazz knowledge and playing, so for that I thank Tag. While I stand by my argument, I understand that I have a long long way to go to become a compitant jazz guitarist (which is probably about all I aspire to in that particular direction of guitar playing).

Jamie

[trap]

i gotta respectfully point out that
more than half of what you
quoted as ME having SAID
was actually YOUR own response;
on a communication level,
that's a drag.
i hope you'll edit/fix that post,
out of a modicum of respect.
thanks.
dt / spltrcl

sorry, i didn't mean to do that, but i'm an old fart, and these new fangled computers...well, i'll fix it.

[shigihara]

(By the way, I don't think Shig was 'knocking your playing' at all. I think he was knocking your hubris, which can get pretty tiring sometimes. He stated you were an intermediate level player, which I don't disagree with.


ken, thank you for reading and understanding correctly...

[Clifford-D]

IV dominant- I tonic. Thats the way I hear it.
I hear Amen this way as well.

Funny, I always played it with just the triad.
Never really payed attention to the seventh.

It's most definatly a IVb7

interesting.

Please explain :)

[shigihara]

......but meant constructively and as sort of an olive branch, since Tag has taken on a confrontational position with me on this whole thread...


i admire your patience... you're building up good karma.


Comments like he made about your playing, however, make me wonder
if olive branches will be seen as such.


hey, can't make everyone happy... :)

and isn't the internet (guitar forums in particular...) the perfect place
to exercise restraint ?

[KRosser]

i admire your patience... you're building up good karma.

*sigh*...savin' up that karma....never know when I'm gonna need to cash some in....



hey, can't make everyone happy... :)

and isn't the internet (guitar forums in particular...) the perfect place
to exercise restraint ?


If you can practice it here, you can practice it anywhere!

(I reserve the right to modify this statement when my twin daughters hit 16....)

[DrSax]

(I reserve the right to modify this statement when my twin daughters hit 16....)

Two teenage daughters?

Man, I had much respect for you before. Now....well, my friend my hat's off to you. I would lock them in a closet until they were at least 40. I KNOW I'm not man enough to deal with that!

:BEER

[Tag]

How much do you spend playing with other humans?

(By the way, I don't think Shig was 'knocking your playing' at all. I think he was knocking your hubris, which can get pretty tiring sometimes. He stated you were an intermediate level player, which I don't disagree with.
FWIW, I happen to like and respect Shig's playing a great deal - did you hear those duets with Mariano? I loved those. There is a depth of maturity and command there that only a lot of experience can get you, not to mention rich imagination and a great team-playing spirit)

I listened to a few of those tracks. I won't be so presumptuous as to assume you want specific direction from me, but again, to elaborate on my general advice - if you want to expand you have to play with lots of people and it at least sounds to me like you don't. Practicing to these tracks is cool - I do it every so often as well - but it's like sparring with a punching bag. Yes, every great boxer does it and every great boxer can hit the bejesus out of a punching bag, but NO boxer will tell you it's a substitute for what you learn in a real fight. It's 'the things you learn in a real fight' that I don't hear.

Hey Ken,

As of the last month or two, I have barely picked up the guitar at all. Before that, I was playing with a bass player 1-2 times a week for about 2 hours each time. We are starting again in a few weeks, and are going to try and do a few duet gigs over the winter. We were in many many rock bands together years ago, and its a lot of fun. Also, your (and others)constructive criticism is ALWAYS, ALWAYS welcome. As I always say when I post in the clips section, I would rather have a constructive critic of my playing over a politically correct "nice playing!" every day of the week.
:BEER

Shig maybe did not realize that I have ALWAYS said I am no more than an intermediate jazz player at best. HOWEVER, he said what he thought of my playing, and I said what I thought of his. Dont bash me for being honest.

[Tag]

[QUOTE]I think thats an effect of playing with a backing track. I think anyone who plays only with backing tracks for a long time will have that same effect. IMHO.

really? Your clips do less, and you are playing with humans. please explain. The video was a practice that I decided to post, I have posted other clips, and I have the backings for anyone who wants to jump in and show me how its done. I think my solos build nicely in most, and the playing is actually very good, and better than MANY pro players I go see. YMMV, and that is fine with me!



He kind of said that it was good advice to a point, but that it could be taken further. Didn't really seem to insult you or your playing at all until you did.

I stated my honest opinion. End of that story.

However, this thread has inspired me to push my jazz knowledge and playing, so for that I thank Tag. While I stand by my argument, I understand that I have a long long way to go to become a compitant jazz guitarist (which is probably about all I aspire to in that particular direction of guitar playing).

Cool.

[Tag]

that's (on the surface) a
very sweet & personally supportive post.
unfortunately, such support might be
seen as more than a little misplaced,
since the basic prerequisite to
learning (anything, at any point)
is our ability to change.

as well, it serves the community poorly
when conversations like this become
re-centered upon personal battles-of-ego & willpower, etc.

dt / spltrcl


Dave, I think he stated he tried the method, and its working for him. Nothing more nothing less. I am 100% sure it will help almost anyone who applies it. It simply can not hurt.

[jimfog]

Also, your (and others)constructive criticism is ALWAYS, ALWAYS welcome. As I always say when I post in the clips section, I would rather have a constructive critic of my playing over a politically correct "nice playing!" every day of the week.




really? Your clips do less, and you are playing with humans. please explain. The video was a practice that I decided to post, I have posted other clips, and I have the backings for anyone who wants to jump in and show me how its done. I think my solos build nicely in most, and the playing is actually very good, and better than MANY pro players I go see. YMMV, and that is fine with me!


OUCH!!! My head hurts from the whiplash!!!!

If you're gonna do that, Tag, be a little bit slower......maybe leave a few posts in between.......or at least warn us!

- Jim

[Tag]

OUCH!!! My head hurts from the whiplash!!!!

If you're gonna do that, Tag, be a little bit slower......maybe leave a few posts in between.......or at least warn us!

- Jim


Sorry Jim. I listened to lala play. No way I am taking criticism from someone who does not even understand what I am playing. I will listen to someone from all levels if they can understand whats being played. thats why I always ask for clips. I have said it from the first time I joined this place years ago. If a guy cant play at a decent level, I really could care less what amp he thinks sounds good, or what he thinks of my playing. If you feel differently, I understand. It just does not work for *me*.

[lalaland]

really? Your clips do less, and you are playing with humans. please explain. The video was a practice that I decided to post, I have posted other clips, and I have the backings for anyone who wants to jump in and show me how its done. I think my solos build nicely in most, and the playing is actually very good, and better than MANY pro players I go see. YMMV, and that is fine with me!
Well, theres only so much interaction, dynamics, feel, soul, whatever, that you can reach from playing with a backing track. I guess what I meant was that most anyone, no matter how good, will have the same issues that (splatt, I think don't quote me on that) and I metioned to some extent when playing with a backing track.

Personally, I liked the video, especially the first couple of licks after the solo. I liked that you didn't double up the melody like Coltrane, cause I've always found that kinda cheesy on guitar. I've listened to every one of your clips that are avalible at various times throughout my participation in this forum.

We've talked about this before, and I know we disagree, but I feel that a backing track is a very poor way to evaluate another player. To provide examples of concepts (and obviously, to practice) they are wonderful tools. I think that alot of the 'classic' solos of any genre (but particularily jazz) wouldn't be all that impressive over a backing track. I like music for the human interaction.

I'd like to hear some constructive critisism - just as you stated :NUTS - if you have some (obviously considering the fact that its not jazz...), and I'd love to hear some when I post the jazz recordings I'm planning to do. I'm not sure what exactly you listened to of mine, but I like 'Shanendoah' quite a lot.

As far as build of solos, I think 'Ambient Jam' and 'Broken Chord' are good examples of that. Obviously alot of interaction between the players in Ambient Jam. And with Broken Chord, the solo is kind of a plateu style thing - ie, building, settling, bulding. Mostly a vertical movement, but some texteral changes as well. Not sure if slide guitar is your thing, so obviously thats way off from what we're talking about here...

I'll really try to get that Naima recording up, if its still around.

I think you play well, and I think you would sound better with a band. I think the skills are so widly different that it would take a long time to adjust (for anyone). I haven't been in that situation, so I don't know.

I do think its mistaken to assume that because I don't ascribe to jazz idiom (and considering all you've heard me play wasn't jazz) that it means I am unable to hear these things. There's only been one example posted, and my ears were in total agreement with KRossers on that one, if that means anything to you. Some of us - I'm guessing quite a few on this board - have a huge intrest and ear in/for jazz, even though its not really what they play. That doesn't negate what they hear or disagree with in this method. I have a large collection of jazz, I've seen damn near every top guitarist in the genre and many of the others (Branford, Wynton, Chick, Meldahu, etc). I have no idea if listing my 'credntials' makes you believe that I can hear what you're talking about. I can hear what you're speaking about in your playing. Just because I don't swing...

I'm probably not seeing the same pros as you, so I can't comment on that.

Look forward to hearing back from you.

FWIW, I'll take a 'good' band over the best guitarist in the world playing over a backing track. Don't know about y'all.

Jamie

[lalaland]

Sorry, it was Gennation.

:D

Jamie

[KRosser]

Two teenage daughters?

Man, I had much respect for you before. Now....well, my friend my hat's off to you. I would lock them in a closet until they were at least 40. I KNOW I'm not man enough to deal with that!

:BEER

Well, they're 12 now. We're already hitting the early stages of 'the teenage thing', big time.

Actually, right now I'm posting from inside the closet....shhhhhh...no one knows where I am....

Sorry for the OT.

Everybody go practice....

[KRosser]

Sorry Jim. I listened to lala play. No way I am taking criticism from someone who does not even understand what I am playing. I will listen to someone from all levels if they can understand whats being played. thats why I always ask for clips. I have said it from the first time I joined this place years ago. If a guy cant play at a decent level, I really could care less what amp he thinks sounds good, or what he thinks of my playing. If you feel differently, I understand. It just does not work for *me*.

That's funny...

Since a big part of making a living for me means having to get the approval of many people who can't or don't play guitar at all, I've learned to care a great deal what some of them think, situation depending

And I don't think I've ever cared if someone understands what I'm doing or not if they're willing to give it their ears....

I could never get behind the concept that something has to be understood to be appreciated, or at least I try not to live my own musical life that way, whether I'm giving or receiving.

Plus, I learn from my students all the time.

[Tag]

That's funny...

Since a big part of making a living for me means having to get the approval of many people who can't or don't play guitar at all, I've learned to care a great deal what some of them think, situation depending

And I don't think I've ever cared if someone understands what I'm doing or not if they're willing to give it their ears....

I could never get behind the concept that something has to be understood to be appreciated, or at least I try not to live my own musical life that way, whether I'm giving or receiving.

Plus, I learn from my students all the time.


Totally understand your point, and since you make