Tonal Center thinking

This is a continuation of a conversation in one of Leon's threads - the Bebop scales thread. I didn't want to go off topic too much over there so here it is.

jbdrumbo asked if I'd elaborate on what I meant by key center improvising.

First, let me say it's better to call it TONAL CENTER thinking improv.

Second, a great player once told me that everything can be reduced down to Blues, Rhythm Changes or Modal. The more I play and the more I learn - the more I see and hear that.

Third, this is a lifelong endeavor for me. This post is in a lot of ways me thinking out loud about the way "I" think about playing tunes ... and I reserve the right to change my mind many times. It's also open to any of you guys saying I'm nuts for thinking that way.

So lets take "Cherokee" (Ray Noble). Always played as fast as possible - and it's got some chords.
The first 16 bars is essentially in Bb major.
It moves through Eb major and Eb minor (the Ab7 in measures 7 and 8 is a sub for Ebm) then goes back to Bb.
There's no time to think all those ii-V's and the occasional iii-vi-ii-V.
It's jazz, which comes from the BLUES *very important never to forget that* and Cherokee's overall structure for the 'A' section is I - IV(iv) - I - V (bars 9 through 16 is a big I iv ii V - rhythm changes).
When you learn the tune you (hopefully) hear the overall structure. That pull from I to IV (remember I'm the guy that believes pop music from the early 20th cent. onward is 'all about getting to the IV' chord and not surprisingly I contributed a IV to the tdpri collective chord progression) and the last eight being the meat of I Got Rhythm.

The big caveat here is that because I've learned (and still use a lot) the chord/scale method, I know a lot of ways to get to IV and back. I can get to the Eb in bar 5 via any method and most of the time it will sound good as long as I play in time and with intent. I'll most likely just go up a 1/2 step from wherever I am which will put me in and around B7ish or E7ish - both can lead nicely to Eb. The Ab7(b5) in measures 7 & 8 is really just an Ebm and it's super common to go from Eb to Ebm (IV to iv) in pop music ( jazz was pop music for a long time). So I'm still just thinking some type of four chord knowing full well that I'm making my way back to I, Bb.

The bridge? ... that's easy. This IS what makes this tune so cool and I believe popular with jazz musicians forever.
Four major keys descending by whole steps for 4 measures each. To me, that's modal. Four keys, 4 bars each (except the last one) descending symmetrically B to A to G to F.
*Since I like the minor conversion thing I tend to think the iim7 (dorian) on all those, C#m7 to Bm7 to Am7 to Gm7. That sets me up nicely to get to the Cm7 (hmmm, Cm7 is a 4th up from Gm7 - see how I like to think) a ii - V back to Bb. (Occasionally I will think ii - I or even V7 - I on all those.)

Now, playing it up to tempo and doing something interesting with it after it's been done to death for 65 years ... that's another kettle of fish.

This is a quintissential 'Cherokee' and one of my personal favorites ...
-Y6U0TD3z34

Just a quick acknowledgement and thanks, Ken. This'll take me a few days to map out and start to digest. I never played Cherokee (I've played Cherokee Maiden; does that count?). Your posts are always very thoughtful; I'll try to do it justice on this end.

Great post K. And like all the good ones - what you have left unsaid or implied is as important as what you did say...I dont want to hijack this post because its so darn good but if I may...

Four major keys descending by whole steps for 4 measures each. To me, that's modal. Four keys, 4 bars each (except the last one) descending symmetrically B to A to G to F.
*Since I like the minor conversion thing I tend to think the iim7 (dorian) on all those, C#m7 to Bm7 to Am7 to Gm7. That sets me up nicely to get to the Cm7 (hmmm, Cm7 is a 4th up from Gm7 - see how I like to think) a ii - V back to Bb. (Occasionally I will think ii - I or even V7 - I on all those.)


I really just sat down at my office computer after teaching a class about harmonic cycles and read this. Thinking in tonal centres also means getting your ears around how those tonal centres move. In the case of Cherokee - the bridge cycles down by whole step - regardless of whether you base your lines on the ii chord or the I chord- so predicting that movement is essential if you want your phrasing to be free and continuous..

That descending whole step cycle is there in How high the Moon , Tune Up and a whole bunch of other tunes - a really important one.

My whole class was based on the premise of learning how new key centres come and go in standard tunes - how they arrive and depart so to speak, which has everything to do with tonal centred playing. Im glad to elaborate on that but maybe its another thread.....:?:

The big caveat here is that because I've learned (and still use a lot) the chord/scale method I know a lot of ways to get to IV and back.

Im glad you said that - because I know this has nothing to do with actually playing scales on chords - and everything to do with the delicate relationships of collections of notes with chords - and how either to create your own licks/lines or rationalise the ones you transcribe - which in my experience can make the difference between someone reading this making (musical) sense of everything you talked about there - and not.

This thread is absolutely for 'hi-jacking'.
It's so friggin' broad - the concept of tonal centers.

*This gets to the heart of why the old guys all say "learn tunes!"
$h1t repeats itself all over the place. The form and harmonic structure I'm talking about. Believe me, if you can play over Cherokee - even slowly - you can play over literally 100 other tunes (at least). Be able to play over it at 1/4 = 200 and very little of anything else is gonna surprise you ... at least as far as knowing what notes work.

Thank you so much, Ken, for this fascinating, thoughtful exposition of how the theory behind your approach to improv has evolved. It's not so easy for me to immediately grasp, but it reads easily and logically, so I'll spend some time with this.
Fortunate that you chose Cherokee as your example, since it's one of those songs, like Lush Life, that I never tire of, either.

Ken, thank you for that post. I used to be a member at the Jimmy Bruno Guitar Institute until it was shut down. Jimmy very much stressed the tonal center approach vs "new chord-new mode" approach which seems to be much overused in teaching jazz nowadays. It was very liberating for me.
Partially thanks to that I got a gig as a rhythm guitar player in a classic swing big-band. There, while playing plenty of 4-to-the-bar rhythm, I discovered how many building blocks repeat all over again in jazz - exactly as you say. This is sooo important. I hope this topic takes off and gets the attention it deserves :)

There was a thread a while back that mentioned John Eliot's book - "Insights in Jazz" and learning tunes with 'lego bricks'.

Kens right - the subject is really broad. So I'll stick to cycles,ii V's and how
Jazz harmony uses the ubiquitious ii V to approach different tonal centres.
Cycles themselves are pretty abstract - some tunes might traverse a whole cycle of major 3rds - Bmaj ,Ebmaj and Gmaj for instance - like Giant Steps -or Bb, Gb and D like the bridge to Have you met Miss Jones .....but most use parts of cycles of 2nds, maj and min 3rds and fourths - but in (almost) all cases these new keys approached via a ii V.

Bb/// Abm7/ Db7/ Gb/// Em7/ A7/ D///

As Ive found in my teaching experience - seeing these cycles in tunes isnt so difficult, but hearing them in such a way as to 'feel' the motion to new key centres is another thing altogether. Thats why Im a stickler for singing the root movement of the whole tune.

Just as important, is learning ii V's and making a point of learning lines to play over them in major and minor keys - because as far as building blocks go, ii V's are cadences , joins, and are found within turnarounds and cycles of all kinds in a multitude of tunes

It also really helps to be able to see (hear) the 'hidden' stuff.
For example in Cherokee that Ab7 in measures 7 & 8 is really an Ebm - one note difference from Eb and a VERY common move from the IV (even in straight up blues and rock).

Another is the classic 'On Green Dolphin Street' move (since I'm a west coaster we'll be in C): | Cmaj7 | % | Ebmaj7 | % | etc. That's another major to minor, C to Cm. Ebmaj7 is just a Cm7(9) in first inversion.
Also measures 9 - 16 does two sets of ii-V-Is - the first one is in Cmaj the next one is in Ebmaj. Basically a slightly more involved and extended version of the first 4 bars.
* ii-Vs and ii-V-Is separated by a minor 3rd (up or down) interval is ridiculously common.

*The Jobim tune 'Wave' - other than the intro and outro Dm7 to G7 vamp, the [A] section is a blues in D. And very cool in that it starts major and ends minor - but a 12 blues none-the-less (not Hubert Sumlin blues but a lot of pentatonic stuff works well). The bridge is set of ii-V-I descending by whole step. Where'd we see that before?

This thread is very interesting to me, but I must admit, I am not familiar with the tunes you guys are talking about. Here's one which gets discussed from time to time. I wondered about the "tonal center thinking" as pertains to the great Benny Golson tune, "Killer Joe." The bridge in that tune is in a different key from the main part, yet it never resolves to the V of the tonic and further yet, it sounds perfect going from A7 back to C7 for the main melody.

Good pick JB. Another 'MUST KNOW' tune for harmonic form (it'll always make that top 30 tunes list).

Here's the Killer Joe 'bridge' in question (which is murdered regularly) ...
|| Em7b5 |A7b9 | Ebm7 | Ab7 | A13 | Ab13 | Em7 | A7 || back to C7 Bb7 etc.

I think of this as two bars of D minor (harmonic minor if you want) and then two bars of Db major (or Eb minor 7), then stay on Db for the A7 down to Ab7 (that's just a sub for Ebm to Ab7). Then back to D for the Em7 to A7.
Because the tempo is relaxed on this tune it's easy to think chord to chord here.
*A lot of guys just think of this whole bridge as two chords - A7alt. and Ab7alt. going back and forth. (I do that a lot - A7 alt/dom to Ab7 mixo then back to A7)
It really depends on the rhythm section. Some guys play it as all ii-Vs others will play bar 6 as a Gb/Ab (Ab11) or bars 4 and 7 as having the fourth in the bass. None of that is much of a concern but if this tune is called on a pickup gig you never know what you're gonna get on the bridge. Keep your ears open.

**There are some who say that the KJ bridge is just in the key of C . Yes, it is technically overall in C major (a big iii - VI) ... but try playing in C major over that bridge - without a good understanding of chord/scale/arpeggio theory as well as altered dom playing - and you'll be in the company of the many whom 'murder' it on the band stand 7 nights a week.
I cringe when that tune is called - some guys don't even go to the bridge on the solos.

Why the last A7 sounds so cool going back to C?
Other than the fact that m3 movement always works in jazz and very well composed 'motion' in the 8 bar structure ... I got no real good answer for ya. Anybody else ... ?

***There's a GREAT live album track of Robben Ford doing it probably in the early 90s in Europe. No idea what record it's on and I can't find a 'tube reference either. It's smokin'!

"...in the summertime when the livin' is easy"

S_VRsGo-FAA

This guy gives a pretty similar analysis of "Cherokee"

L3V8y33mPwo

T I'll stick to cycles,ii V's and how
Jazz harmony uses the ubiquitous ii V to approach different tonal centres.
Cycles themselves are pretty abstract - some tunes might traverse a whole cycle of major 3rds - Bmaj ,Ebmaj and Gmaj for instance - like Giant Steps -or Bb, Gb and D like the bridge to Have you met Miss Jones .....but most use parts of cycles of 2nds, maj and min 3rds and fourths - but in (almost) all cases these new keys approached via a ii V.

Bb/// Abm7/ Db7/ Gb/// Em7/ A7/ D///

As Ive found in my teaching experience - seeing these cycles in tunes isn't so difficult, but hearing them in such a way as to 'feel' the motion to new key centres is another thing altogether. That's why I'm a stickler for singing the root movement of the whole tune.

Just as important, is learning ii V's and making a point of learning lines to play over them in major and minor keys - because as far as building blocks go, ii V's are cadences , joins, and are found within turnarounds and cycles of all kinds in a multitude of tunes

+1
Cycles; SUPER important.
So much of the jazz repertoire comprises tunes that use some type of cycle.
The ones SP mentioned above are key to learn.
Others important ones would be Recordame (no me esqueca), Minority, Maiden Voyage (modal sequences) and Four (4th motion, maj to min, 1/2 step motion and ii-Vs *it's got it all in a 16 bar tune* and it's called Four for a reason).

My whole class was based on the premise of learning how new key centres come and go in standard tunes - how they arrive and depart so to speak, which has everything to do with tonal centred playing. Im glad to elaborate on that but maybe its another thread.


Please ... elaborate!

Ken: How do you view the chord tones from this way of thinking?

Ken: How do you view the chord tones from this way of thinking?

I'm not positive I completely understand your question in this context (tonal center thinking) - but the back story is I know what the chord tones are and I learned all that first.

Lets take JBmando's example: the bridge of 'Killer Joe' ...
| Em7b5 |A7b9 | Ebm7 | Ab7 | A13 | Ab13 | Em7 | A7 |
I know what all the chord tones, as well as the ext. and alt. tones that are in those changes but many times I prefer to play within the bigger tonal centers - the main movement. Dmin to Dbmaj and then up Dmaj (or A7alt - Ab7alt - A7alt). Because I've learned the chord tone/chordscale/arpeggio approach and because I've been doing this a long time I 'hear' - via experience - the chord tones, extensions and alterations.

Is that close to an answer?

Thank you Ken I understand it better now and I agree its the best way to have the chord tone concept down first then move on to this concept. For beginners it can sound very "running a scale up and down" if they don't understand the cord tone concept.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

If you really want to have fun with theory and analysis, find a symphony, then go through the score and mark the keys that you are in. Baroque, Classical, and Romantic composers loved to work with tonal centers. I had started with jazz theory, and after that, studied classical music theory. I couldn't understand what the big deal was, as the chords were very, very simple: Major, minor, dom. 7, dim. 7, all based on I ii IV V vio7. The progressions themselves were very basic, and the quality of the chords were mostly triadic, with a lot of V7 chords. 9ths and altered chords appeared more frequently in late Romantic, but not so much in earlier eras.

It wasn't until I studied analysis that I learned to appreciate the key relationships in a piece. The relation of motives, themes, keys, and form is what drives the emotional narrative of a symphony or sonata. I don't teach theory or analysis classes anymore, but I still sit on exam committees several times a year. In the oral component, one thing we always, always do, is have the student point out the keys of a work. We expect that we could point to any measure and have the student tell us the key.

The beauty thing about keys in that kind of music is that there are standard, or what we call textbook, key patterns for different forms, usually sonata form. More often than not, a composer will deviate from textbook form, which gives rise to emotion and drama.

If I could offer one piece of advice that will have a potentially huge impact on one as a musician, it would be to find a score to the first movement of a symphony by Haydn, Mozart, or Beethoven and mark the keys. Doing this with a recording is immensely helpful, as often the ear knows right away what the keys are.

For those who are pretty comfortable doing the above, I would recommend delving into Schenker. He came up with a method for relating large-scale key structures to the smallest details of pitches and chords. It is not something that one can learn in one sitting. However, the very first time a teacher introduced the concept in an analysis class, I very quickly went, aha. Of course, I get it. Now I see. With training, one can look at a Schenker graph and see the tonal centers and how the details of the score are connected to the larger key relations. I think jazz musicians who improvise well will really take to the theory. Like me, you may never hear music that changes keys the same again. It unifies everything that is going on harmonically in a work.

One more thing. According to Schenker, music doesn't change keys or modulate. What appears to be a key change is actually an emphasis or elaboration of particular moments in a work.

I was just talking to a student of mine who landed a job at a great university. The text they use is based on Schenkerian ideas that are rooted in voice-leading. Her previous teaching gig, at MIT, which has courses in undergrad theory, used a different book that is also based on those ideas. Here, where I teach, the undergrad curriculum has changed from a harmonic approach in my heyday, to another version of Schenker-influenced ideas. It is only a matter of time, I would hazard a guess, that jazz teaching would be influenced by Schenker as well. I think that the "new chord, new mode" approach someone mentioned above, is due for a revision that emphasizes tonal centers, thus setting the stage for Schenkerian thinking.

OK, you finally got me Larry.
I just ordered a Schenkerian analysis book.
I have several long plane rides coming up. Hopefully it'll get here before I split.

I would hazard a guess, that jazz teaching would be influenced by Schenker as well. I think that the "new chord, new mode" approach someone mentioned above, is due for a revision that emphasizes tonal centers, thus setting the stage for Schenkerian thinking.

I think Schenker's influence on Jazz teaching is already happening...I recently read some Schenkerian analysis of some Charlie Parker's and Bill Evans solos. Its a real revelation - or it certainly is for me.But its a much slower process for your average undergrad who isnt really conversant enough with recognizing large scale patterns.
I make a point of getting my students to spend time listening to scores and strategies for discerning the relationship between form and tonal organisation in different styles of classical music - but jazz students also need to "micro manage" their harmony in practice - if they are going to be convincing at playing changes.
In retrospect I can see the critical relationship between the two approaches - but for some of the students its a dualism that they arent quite ready for - that will change as they mature as musicians.

Please ... elaborate!

Ok - I'll get some stuff together and post it here in some condensed form. But if any of you have read "Hearing the Changes" by Jerry Coker , its really more of the technique of recognising chunks of harmony - which he calls "function cells".
For those of us who know a few tunes - John Eliot's "Insights in jazz" is a really interesting and highly individual approach to making associations between harmonic sequences in Jazz standards - and I recommend it in the same way that I'd recommend a book like "The artists way" - as a way forward that suggests ideas (in this case for memorising tunes) rather than prescribes them. My job as a teacher is to re intepret this stuff for students who only know a dozen tunes or so - so its about grasping turnarounds, cadences and cycles quickly - and the many variations thereof.

But doesnt it just emphasise the importance of learning the tunes themselves?

jazz students also need to "micro manage" their harmony in practice - if they are going to be convincing at playing changes.
In retrospect I can see the critical relationship between the two approaches - but for some of the students its a *dualism* that they aren't quite ready for - that will change as they mature as musicians.



When I write about an overall tonal center approach it has to be understood that I am very aware of this dualism. I can only play effectively, seemingly without thinking about each individual chord, because I already did the micro work - chord tones, scales, arpeggios, modes, whatever - for a long time and kind of intensely. It's burned into me. I know it like I know what color my car is or what my sons name is or my phone number. I don't have to articulate that stuff all the time but I never stop 'knowing' it.
That's what Parker meant when he (unsubstantiated) said "forget all that $h1t and play".

I can only play effectively, seemingly without thinking about each individual chord, because I already did the micro work - chord tones, scales, arpeggios, modes, whatever - for a long time and kind of intensely.

Indeed. This stuff enables a player to start having a musical dialogue with the form -and it can be just baby steps. The first time a student plays a major scale starting on F descending down to the E below its octave through a ii V I -*

Dm7 | G7 | C
F E D C | B A G F | E

and they realise that the "melody" they play can express the harmony - is a revelation and the beginning of a process of where -hopefully - they begin to see the linear harmony and the vertical harmony as intrinsically connected - as later on (hopefully) they will see that the progression and the form are interrelated- not just one thing super imposed on the other.

*I'd like to emphasise that the scale itself isnt so important. But the way the chord tones hit the chords through the ii V I is critical.

Indeed. This stuff enables a player to start having a musical dialogue with the form -and it can be just baby steps. The first time a student plays a major scale starting on F descending down to the E below its octave through a ii V I -*

Dm7 | G7 | C
F E D C | B A G F | E

and they realise that the "melody" they play can express the harmony - is a revelation and the beginning of a process of where -hopefully - they begin to see the linear harmony and the vertical harmony as intrinsically connected - as later on (hopefully) they will see that the progression and the form are interrelated- not just one thing super imposed on the other.

*I'd like to emphasise that the scale itself isnt so important. But the way the chord tones hit the chords through the ii V I is critical.

That little example over the ii-V-I is really deep ... and SP knows it!
(two tetra chords plus a half)
I'm not gonna get too far into it but this is a tiny little glimpse into what George Russell is really getting at. That's a lydian scale descending and not a #11 to be found over any of those chords:?::idea:.

I can only play effectively, seemingly without thinking about each individual chord, because I already did the micro work - chord tones, scales, arpeggios, modes, whatever - for a long time and kind of intensely. It's burned into me. I know it like I know what color my car is or what my sons name is or my phone number.

Yeah, I use the analogy of my family. I know who everyone is, but I don't always speak their names. I think one thing that bothers people who aren't conversant yet, is that writing about it inevitably sounds stilted, wordy, and mechanical.

For example, when I write "ii-V-I," I automatically mean all keys, the possibility of sevenths, ninths, and other extensions, as well as alterations, the relation to IV-V-I, the alterations for minor keys, and, most importantly, the history and usage of this pattern, which I assume that readers share with me. By "readers," I mean people who speak the language. Now, in a forum like this, I assume a mixed readership, and I am majorly interested in helping people explore this stuff. The difficulty is that sometimes a point I am trying to make gets obscured if I try to define concepts as I write. At that point, people sometimes think that we are trying to act smart and better than them. Which is absolutely not my intention, nor do I see it in the writings here of others. I practically weep when someone says we are being scientific or technical and that we need more drinkin' and less thinkin'. They are actually write about the thinkin', which we don't do much of in these threads because we are writing about my family, or Ken's car.

Lol!
I assume that most folks here understand by now that I'm (we're) not trying to 'show off'. And also that I won't insult anybody or assume ignorance by dumbing down a concept. I learn a ton of stuff here and am very thankful that there is such a forum as this with interested, interesting and such conversive (a word?) participants.

I'd also like to point out that "somedays you get the bear and somedays the bear gets you" . Last night I played one the $h1ttiest solos ever on 'Another You' ... I'm still f'n pissed off and embarrassed about it. Cest la vie!

Lol!
I assume that most folks here understand by now that I'm (we're) not trying to 'show off'. And also that I won't insult anybody or assume ignorance by dumbing down a concept. I learn a ton of stuff here and am very thankful that there is such a forum as this with interested, interesting and such conversive (a word?) participants.

I'd also like to point out that "somedays you get the bear and somedays the bear gets you" . Last night I played one the $h1ttiest solos ever on 'Another You' ... I'm still f'n pissed off and embarrassed about it. Cest la vie!

This is a good place for me to interject that a) I am blown away by this thread; b) as is often the case, much of what you guys are discussing is beyond me; but c) I have grown tremendously from the parts I have been able to glean in the past, as I expect I will grow from this thread (Larry, I was working already this morning on ii-V-I in several different keys, something I've never thought much about.) Thanks again to all of you.

I think I might start listening to jazz, I hope with a different ear.

Doesn't Jerry Coker have a book filled with ii-V-I patterns? I'm not playing jazz anymore, but if I was, I would really focus on that progression and get some good muscle memory actions going.

It would also be a good place to experiment with chord extensions and alterations.

BTW, in my first paragraph, I was thinking about single notes, but chords in the second paragraph.

Also, we know that V has a dominant function. This means that one could use a viio, viio7, vii half-dim 7, bII7 (I won't get anyone's shorts in a twist by calling it N7). In classical theory, ii is sometimes said to have a pre-dominant function. A very common substitution for ii is IV. They both are pre-dominants.

N7 is L7 ... sorry, a moment of lightness.

While I was thinking about writing something about the tonal ‘blocks;’ that keep recurring in jazz tunes – with a view to memorising the progressions- I also thought that with all the experience hanging here also thought it might be a great idea to start a list that all can add to of recogniseable ‘chunks’.

This is all documented elsewhere btw - Hearing the Changes and Insights in Jazz - and David Bakers Book on learning tunes - so its nothing new - but its so much good sense!

I follow the Eliot idea of dividing tonal ‘chunks’ into a few categories…

Also I should point out that knowing the tune/melody is essential in this process




Cadences

iim7 V7 I – in minor too

faux min iiø V7 I

some variations

extended cadence – vim7 iim7 V7 I - also run to IV as in “All the things”

TT sub bVIm7 bII7 I

II7 V7 I – mellow II V (countless tunes!)

ii #ii•7 iiim7 or Ib (Basie ending)

iim7 bII7 I

II/I bII/I I (Green Dolphin st)

bVI V7 I (Night and Day)

IV I - Amen - plagal

Rainbow I III IV I

Prince I III7 IV VI

Moments - C#m7 F#7 Dm7 G7 etc.

Stablemates Ebm7 Ab7 Dm7 G7 etc.

please augment!

Turnarounds and sequences

I VI ii V – lots of variants including subbing III for I – the “Foggy day” turnaround I bIII ii V– feel free to add

I bIII bVI bII – ladybird

I I7 IV #ivdim I/V - Rhythm ‘A2”



Autumn Leaves
- ivm7 bVII7 III bVI iiø V7 im7

All the things/Pennies ending
IV ivm7 iiim7 #iidim7 iim7 V7 I

Montgomery Ward bridge (Honeysuckle rose) I7 IV II7 V7 (in basic form)
Sears Roebuck bridge (Rhythm changes) III7 VI7 II7 V7

It could happen to you intro
I iiim7 VI7 iim7 #ivø VII7


Whisperin’ High

I #ivm7 VII7 I iiim7 VI7 II7

"Another YOU" (Confirmation, Blues for Alice)
I VIIø III7 vim7 vm7 I7 IV etc..

I VI7 II7 iim7 V7 I - the "Donna Lee" t/around


CYCLES!

Memorising all of the above relies on identifying the tonal centre of each cell and the cyclic movement /relationship (if any) of one cell to another

as in the bridge to “Lover”

E Fdim7 F#m7 B7 (X2) G G#dim7 Am7 D7 Em7 A7 Dm7 G7

2 identical turnarounds in E and G - and a turnaround in C - 3 tonal centres ( I always remember this one by reminding myself that the tonal centres of this tune spell out a Cmaj triad….

Its amazing how many tunes you can assemble from the above -

hundreds......

I assume that most folks here understand by now that I'm (we're) not trying to 'show off'. And also that I won't insult anybody or assume ignorance by dumbing down a concept. I learn a ton of stuff here and am very thankful that there is such a forum as this with interested, interesting and such conversive (a word?) participants.


All of the above is a case in point - it was a discussion here that led me to Eliots book and the sudden realisation that Ive been doing this for many years without really knowing it!

Outstanding!

That and learn these 40 tunes and you're good to go ...

Essential Tunes for HARMONIC Form:
Rhythm Changes (Oleo, Anthropology, Eternal Triangle)
Blues (Straight No Chaser, Bags Groove)
Minor Blues (Equinox, Mr. PC)
Footprints ("blues" with extended turnaround)
A-Train / Ipanema
Yardbird Suite
Minority
Four
All of Me
Autumn Leaves
Black Orpheus / Sugar
Blue Bossa
Recorda Me / Yes & No
Green Dolphin St. (C & Eb)
How High the Moon
Impressions / So What (modal)
Maiden Voyage (more "complex" modal)
Funny Valentine
Solar
Wave
Song For My Father
Night & Day
All the Things You Are
Blue & Green
Caravan (Long alt. 1 chord w/ bridge)
Scrapple From the Apple (Honeysuckle Rose)
Killer Joe (Dom. 7th vamp w/ bridge)
What Is This Thing Called Love
Confirmation / Cherokee
Stella By Starlight

* Extra Credit, though 'Necessary' for a complete understanding.

Joy Spring / Ceora
Night In Tunisia
Giant Steps (Countdown)
All Blues(3/4)
Early Autumn
Take 5
Moment's Notice
Tenderly
Stardust
Freedom Jazz Dance (Miles Mode)

N7 is L7 ... sorry, a moment of lightness.

Bingo!!!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QxMrQhkWVIc/T2JwCDg5eqI/AAAAAAAAAmY/ZMktJ4zNm0A/s1600/bingo.jpg

Bingo!!!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QxMrQhkWVIc/T2JwCDg5eqI/AAAAAAAAAmY/ZMktJ4zNm0A/s1600/bingo.jpg

:lol:

I'm relatively new to the tonal center approach to jazz. I have been recently preparing to start the Howard Roberts, "Jazz Guitar Technique in 20 Weeks" which is a pretty intense method. As soon as I can get life to slow down, I'm going to jump in. Just preparing for it, I have learned an amazing amount.

Doesn't Jerry Coker have a book filled with ii-V-I patterns?

Yes, "Patterns For Jazz" (a little dry - but great info) http://www.amazon.com/Patterns-Jazz-Treble-Jerry-Coker/dp/0898987032

This is another outstanding Coker book. "Improvising Jazz" - it has a bunch of standard forms categorized such as 'common [A] sections', various 'rhythm bridges', just about every permutation of a 'jazz blues' you can think of. (all notation and roman numerals)
http://www.amazon.com/Improvising-Jazz-Fireside-Jerry-Coker/dp/0671628291/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1344178429&sr=1-1&keywords=jerry+coker%27s+improvising+jazz

And this: http://www.amazon.com/dp/157623875X/ref=nosim?tag=telecasterdis-20&link_code=as2&creativeASIN=157623875X&creative=374929&camp=211189

*These are texts/method books that were written in the early 70's.
Players like Metheny, Scofield, Bergonzie, Chris Potter, etc. - the newer generation of 'legends' (and probably ALL the young guys today) - used/use these books or at least look through them and glean a few things that interest them.

There are others: Walt Weiskopf and Ramon Ricker books.
Liebman books too. this one's a mind blower: http://www.amazon.com/Chromatic-Approach-Jazz-Harmony-Melody/dp/3892210306/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1344178875&sr=1-2&keywords=dave+liebman+books

Great thread, I'll be coming back to this quite frequently. I had a question as I'm starting to see the benefits moving into a more harmonic/melodic tonal focus in my playing, do you guys have any thoughts on Ralph Patt's Vanilla changes songbook (http://www.ralphpatt.com/Song.html). It seems like a good resource but I haven't spent much time browsing it. Basically it's stripped down chords (major/minor and 7ths) so it's easier for a beginner to digest. I like the concept of it but haven't given it much thought. Is there anything like this that you'd recommend to get a beginner into seeing some of those main patterns you've mentioned (like blues, rhythm changes, or modal or perhaps some of the more in depth things mentioned later like cadences, turnabouts etc...)

Philosophically I like the idea of quickly being able to explicate song structure. It seems to me that music isn't so scary when I can "say oh this is just a ii-V-I thing" and "this is just a bridge" and "here it just bounces back between the I and IV". Even if there are a lot of chords and embellishment I tend to learn things quicker when I can understand the foundation (which is why I like this thread so much!!!!)

The 'Vanilla Book' is fantastic!
I discovered it about 10 years ago - about the same time that I was becoming aware of my own drift towards tonal centre thinking.

The Jerry Coker books I mention in my previous post (#34) are very good for really seeing form and repetition. The books that SlowPinky recommends are great too ... Coker - "Hearing the Changes" and Elliot - "Insights in Jazz" as well as David Bakers Book on learning tunes.

Besides this particular thread, we talk about it a lot in general here.

*to reiterate: I already know and still actively utilize chord/scale/arpeggio/mode thinking. Tonal center awareness is a meta technique, a gestalt.

Just to clarify this a bit for a dunce like me, if you are playing in the tonal centre method in say A major, when you come to another chord like d major, do you play the same scale but just emphasise the chord tones etc of the new chord? And avoid the notes that don't fit so well over it?

I know this is way too simplistic but I was wondering how to piece it all together in regards to what to play over each chord if you are using essentially one scale.

Just to clarify this a bit for a dunce like me, if you are playing in the tonal centre method in say A major, when you come to another chord like d major, do you play the same scale but just emphasise the chord tones etc of the new chord? And avoid the notes that don't fit so well over it?

I know this is way too simplistic but I was wondering how to piece it all together in regards to what to play over each chord if you are using essentially one scale.

Not simplistic at all and also a very good question.
And the answer - for me - is another question ...
"Is the D going back to A or possibly continuing on somewhere else?"
If it goes back to A after say two or four measures then yes, maybe emphasize notes in a D chord but understand that you're going back to A. It's different if say we're going to G or C - the tonal center now may be shifting. It's all about knowing where you're headed.

Not simplistic at all and also a very good question.
And the answer - for me - is another question ...
"Is the D going back to A or possibly continuing on somewhere else?"
If it goes back to A after say two or four measures then yes, maybe emphasize notes in a D chord but understand that you're going back to A. It's different if say we're going to G or C - the tonal center now may be shifting. It's all about knowing where you're headed.

OK, I hope I can ask a simplistic question and it turn out to be good, too :smile:. This is from a song folks over in the P&W forum might recognize, "Sing To The King". Two sections, the first is the chorus which can repeat as follows:

|: E | E | F#m7 | F#m7 | A | A | E | D A :|
This is not an unusual progression, and when there is a solo opportunity over it, I have some stuff that is based around the melody. Very safe solo :smile:.

Progression where chorus leads to a break
| E | E | F#m7 | F#m7 | A | A | (to break)
| D | A/C# | E/B | B | D | A/C# | C | C | E |

We try to use this break as an opportunity to improv, but I really struggle with coming up with something interesting, because I usually am basing what I will play on what key I think I am in over the whole section. In this case, that is a challenge for me.

My question is how would tonal center thinking approach this?

I would solo in E major pentatonic for this song, but what version do you guys do? I haven't heard any version in E with a C in it.

I would solo in E major pentatonic for this song, but what version do you guys do? I haven't heard any version in E with a C in it.

We do a version based on the one by Eoghan Heaslip. It has the break in it as I wrote out. I found the video:

-uzT6gYpiqU

Cool version. The C is an outlier though. It's just an arranger's creative passing tone harmony. E major pentatonic works for the whole solo until you get to it. Especially if the solo starts after what you posted.

The C in there is very cool.
It's all still in E but you will have to play in C over the C chord.
It's 'really' just a sub for an Am. As JB said - an arrangers choice (and a good choice it is). Minor IV is very common coming from regular IV - in this case the A/C# and then getting to I. C major and A minor are almost the same thing. We call Am the relative minor of C.

Try this ... when it gets to the 'C' chord play some E minor pentatonic (blues) licks and then end on E major when it gets to the E chord. Or, as I mentioned before, just play a C triad.

*Personally, I would also play very triadically over the D - A/C# - E stuff. But I still feel that everything is about getting to the key of E major.

Cool version. The C is an outlier though. It's just an arranger's creative passing tone harmony. E major pentatonic works for the whole solo until you get to it.

*Personally, I would also play very triadically over the D - A/C# - E stuff. But I still feel that everything is about getting to the key of E major.

Thanks guys! With this song I've felt like E major pentatonic worked through the break over the D - A/C# - E stuff, but the C always left me uncertain when I got to it. I think that in the OP it was mentioned how "playing with intent" is so important. My lack of intent results in my solo just kinda going lame through the C (to my ears anyway).

I generally tend to solo more melodically ("triadically"?) when I am confident. I think the clarification about the key staying E major and what the C is doing there helps me look at this correctly and hopefully play more creatively.

Not simplistic at all and also a very good question.
And the answer - for me - is another question ...
"Is the D going back to A or possibly continuing on somewhere else?"
If it goes back to A after say two or four measures then yes, maybe emphasize notes in a D chord but understand that you're going back to A. It's different if say we're going to G or C - the tonal center now may be shifting. It's all about knowing where you're headed.

Thanks