[jacksonplayer]

That is an interesting way of looking at it, although I agree about maybe overthinking it a bit.

I like to think of scales as overlapping circles. If you want to be all neat and clean, you can keep everything within the discreet area of a "single circle." But to me, the interesting stuff happens when the background is in one scale/mode and the top line is in a partially overlapping scale. How much you dart in and out of harmonic tonality, how you resolve your lines, etc. That becomes the creative act. Jazz too easily turns into math. And I hate math.

[distressed_romeo]

Originally Posted by jacksonplayer

That is an interesting way of looking at it, although I agree about maybe overthinking it a bit.

I like to think of scales as overlapping circles. If you want to be all neat and clean, you can keep everything within the discreet area of a "single circle." But to me, the interesting stuff happens when the background is in one scale/mode and the top line is in a partially overlapping scale. How much you dart in and out of harmonic tonality, how you resolve your lines, etc. That becomes the creative act. Jazz too easily turns into math. And I hate math.

Good way of looking at it. It really amazes me when you see jazzers who've absorbed so much advanced harmonic theory that they can just blow through difficult changes as naturally as most people would a ii-V vamp! I guess the goal is to develop this stuff to the point where it stops being about maths and musical geometry and becomes pure expression...

This is the thing I love about music...there's always something new to learn!

[jacksonplayer]

Originally Posted by distressed_romeo

I guess the goal is to develop this stuff to the point where it stops being about maths and musical geometry and becomes pure expression...

Very true. And I am a LONG ways from that point.

[distressed_romeo]

Originally Posted by jacksonplayer

Very true. And I am a LONG ways from that point.

You and me both dude!

[Drew]

Interesting discussion.

Originally Posted by jacksonplayer

...but then I generally prefer the simplest possible approach to these things.

It's worth noting that I was jamming over "Summertime" with some people not too long ago, and my ability to play a cohesive, musical-sounding solo increased, like, seventy-five fold when I stopped trying to play through each change, and just treated it as an Am blues with a few substitutions that I just needed to drop in a few chord tones to make fit.

It's when you try to overcomplicate things that you paralyze yourself.

[distressed_romeo]

Originally Posted by Drew

Interesting discussion.



It's worth noting that I was jamming over "Summertime" with some people not too long ago, and my ability to play a cohesive, musical-sounding solo increased, like, seventy-five fold when I stopped trying to play through each change, and just treated it as an Am blues with a few substitutions that I just needed to drop in a few chord tones to make fit.

It's when you try to overcomplicate things that you paralyze yourself.

I just remembered, I once read an interview with Larry Carlton where he said that when he was playing with Steely Dan, and having to navigate some insane changes, he'd (quote, unquote) 'think of everything as a blues and shrink to fit'.
Similarly, Emily Remler apparently had a method where she'd think of everything as being based on the Lydian or Melodic Minor scales. I already mentioned Pat Martino's 'converting to minor' system; apparently Greg Howe did a similar thing when he was getting into fusion after his first album, although according to a recent interview he doesn't anymore.

[JBroll]

The sad thing is that with too much reading into the changes and trying to figure out what to do over given progressions, Giant Steps is easier than a ii-V or a blues.

I stopped studying that stuff over two years ago, and I still can't play the fucking blues.

Jeff

[jacksonplayer]

Originally Posted by JBroll

I stopped studying that stuff over two years ago, and I still can't play the fucking blues.

Find a local 'open mic' blues jam and join in. Trust me, you'll learn VERY quickly in front of a room full of drunks.

Seriously, that's how I did it, and I turned into a half-decent blues player within a few months, maybe even weeks. That was about 20 years ago, though, and I pretty much suck at blues now. I didn't do the SRV thing; Albert King was more my role model.

Since everything is a I-IV-V, blues jamming is great even if you don't know a lot of songs.

[Bartok]

Originally Posted by distressed_romeo

I guess the goal is to develop this stuff to the point where it stops being about maths and musical geometry and becomes pure expression...

That is the whole point- you have to know so much theory that you never need to think about it in any situation, your hands know what to do so your brain can concentrate on what you plan to play next. I wish I could do it

Emily Remler apparently had a method where she'd think of everything as being based on the Lydian or Melodic Minor scales

Isn't the Lydian method similar to Lydian Chromatic or do you mean something else? I'm pretty sure every modal player converts to something though- the way modal theory is taught IME is you start with major and it's modes, then you move to something else, harmonic minor is an easy choice as it fits the major modes nicely with a sharp that counts down from Aeolian #7 to Mixolydian #1 (sort of ) then Hungarian Minor has 2 sharps etc. That's how I view the fretboard, then you have your pentatonic options where the root sits over Dorian (and it's derivitives), Phrygian (etc.) or Aeolian (etc.) and you can dip in and out of what ever you want whenever you want. I rarely use major scale or it's modes, but I still view more or less all the scales as major with bits added, taken away or moved. Except for more unusual stuff like 6 note scales (Bartok for example, which I use a lot) but that can still be viewed as part of the Hungarian Minor scale (the 4th degree, I forget it's name) with an Augmented 5th and #6, or even just swapping the natural 5 round to being a flat 7 if you wanted.
Good thread!

[jacksonplayer]

Originally Posted by Bartok

I wish I could do it

Me too!

I'm strictly a modal player, and I really just use the straight-ahead church modes. I rarely find the need to go into altered scales (Hungarian minor, etc.), and when I'm confronted with an altered chord I tend to find a 'regular' mode that fits that particular chord. Lot less stuff to keep in the brain, that way.

I had a good guitar teacher when I started out, but he was teaching me a lot of theory before my chops had a chance to catch up. I wish I had gone on to study jazz theory when I was young and had lots of time to absorb it. I can still pick up bits here and there, but as I get older I want to use my time to actually write/record music and polish what I already know, rather than delve into entirely new areas.