开云体育

Of the younger generation, David Stryker definitely belongs on that list,
and of the older generation, so do Kenny Burrell and Herb Ellis.


--
Bob Schwartz

bitonal pendulum approach.
By picking 2 triads, you have 6 notes to play with (out of 8),

Don't you mean out of 7?

Yes. I mean 7.
Thanx.

Hi Vitor,

When I need to do a solo intro for a tune I'll typically draw from one of
these sources...

1. use a typical turn-around: iii-vi-ii-V, I-vi-ii-V, ii-V-I, etc...
throwing in a bunch of altered extensions and substitutions for these chords
to make it interesting.

2. use the ending phrase of the tune to set up the beginning.

3. just vamp on the I chord (not extremely, brilliantly creative, but often
is very appropriate for the setup.)

Hope this is of some help,

Ted Vieira
--
Listen to my CDs for free:


--
Or visit my website:

Bio Information, Sound Files,
Free Online Guitar Instruction, Books, CDs and more...


From: "Vitor" <varp@...>
Reply-To: jazz_guitar@...
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:43:31 -0000
To: jazz_guitar@...
Subject: [jazz_guitar] Guitar intros

Hi guys!!
I'm starting playing in a duo and i have to do many solo guitar
intros.
My question is about what's usual to do in intros of jazz
standards. I would like information about a more classical
aproach like for eg.: How would Joe Pass make a intro? And
about a more modern aproach, eg.: How would Mick Goodrick
make an intro? (for standards). By the way, anyone knows any
record of Mick Goodrick playing standards?
So, if you can help, i appreciate.
Thank's.

Vitor.
Portugal.

Say Hey!!

I noticed Jimmy's omission too and I wonder what these critics are thinking.
My issues is burried in the pile here, but Jimmy ought to be near the top.

Calling one player best is splitting hairs. Who knows who voted, when, and
on what criteria? There are wonderful players out there, too many who are
really great to make a short list. But, it's my computer so here's some
suggestions, not necessarily in order.

These are people I'd go to see to hear exciting jazz. No apologies for
omitting some that many regard as great, but I've seen and don't care to see
again.


Jimmy Bruno,
Ron Eschete - really inventive and swings
Russell Malone
Mimi Fox
Bill Frasell
John Stowell
Paul Bollenback
Dan Faehnle
Mundell Lowe
Peter Berstein
Peter Leitch
John Stowell
Joshua Breakstone
Larry Coryell
Gray Sergeant
Mark Elf
Howard Alden
Pat Martino
Tuck Andress
JOhn Pisano
Ron Affif

As I said, not in order. Great players who have passed on or retired are
omitted, but I still listen to them.

Let's hear from others. I was truly astonished that Jimmy wasn't on the
list. He does it all. Great fire and chops, and, fortunately, musical
sense to say something. I've heard others with great chops that bore you
after one set, but not Jimmy.

My 2 cents for tonight.


At 03:06 AM 8/14/01 -0000, you wrote:

I was looking at the recent issue of Downbeat with its awards for
players of the year. I was surprised and disappointed that Jimmy
Bruno didn't make the list of either Top Guitarists or "Players
Deserving Wider Recognition" (or something like that). Scofield and
Frisell were tied in the first category, and Kurt Rosenwinkel was
first in the second group, but no sign of Bruno. Any thoughts? Is
it because he spends so much time in Philly? Is it a personality
thing?

Rick

Lan Mosher
Have Guitar, Will Travel
10103 SE 248th Court, C-302, Kent WA 98031 [253] 859-4404
www.halcyon.com/ceolan Fax: 253-813-1005

--- In jazz_guitar@y..., "Rick" <e_goosenberg@f...> wrote:

I was looking at the recent issue of Downbeat with its awards for
players of the year. I was surprised and disappointed that Jimmy
Bruno didn't make the list of either Top Guitarists or "Players
Deserving Wider Recognition" (or something like that). Scofield and
Frisell were tied in the first category, and Kurt Rosenwinkel was
first in the second group, but no sign of Bruno. Any thoughts? Is
it because he spends so much time in Philly? Is it a personality
thing?

Rick

Maybe he's too traditional -- not innovative enough (guessing based
on the names that did make it).

I was looking at the recent issue of Downbeat with its awards for
players of the year. I was surprised and disappointed that Jimmy
Bruno didn't make the list of either Top Guitarists or "Players
Deserving Wider Recognition" (or something like that). Scofield and
Frisell were tied in the first category, and Kurt Rosenwinkel was
first in the second group, but no sign of Bruno. Any thoughts? Is
it because he spends so much time in Philly? Is it a personality
thing?

Rick

I agree with your list except I have never heard Mimi Fox so can't comment.

Jimmy Bruno is a great player. He is going to be in Wales this week where I
get the opportunity to see and hear him again together with Jack Wilkins,
Randy Johnston, Gary Potter, Adrian Ingram, Louis Stewart, Fapy Lafertin,
Mike Walker, Andy Mackenzie and Trefor Owen. This was a great event last year
and I'm excited at the prospect of seeing so many good players again.

Earlier this year I saw John Stowell (Tasteful), Mundell Lowe (Classy) and
shared the platform with Adran, Andy and John Pisano (Great but scary
experience).

Best Regards

Vernon Fuller
St Helens
United Kingdom

--- In jazz_guitar@y..., "Ken" <kuboken1@y...> wrote:

So what I do a lot is just pick 2 triads and mix up the notes.
Explore the possibilities of just using the notes in the
G major triad and the A major triad and you will find lots of new

stuff

to play over B-7b5. Take an hour or more just exploring
all the combinations of notes, skiping octaves, just use one note
of one triad and all of another, etc.. it's endless.

I think this is sometimes called triad pairs, or a simplified
variation of Charlie Bonakas' (spell?)

Banacos.

bitonal pendulum approach.
By picking 2 triads, you have 6 notes to play with (out of 8),

Don't you mean out of 7?

--- In jazz_guitar@y..., "Natalie Lanoville" <gnat@w...> wrote:

I hope I'm not out of line asking what a super-locrian scale is? I
am familiar with the basic 7 modes, but I guess this one is a
guitar-only mode?

Natalie Anne Lanoville

Hi Natalie,

It's not guitar-only by any means. It's the seventh mode of the
_melodic_ minor scale (aka jazz minor scale), and also goes by the
names "altered scale", "diminished whole-tone scale", and "Pomeroy
scale".

The C melodic/jazz minor scale is C D Eb F G A B

so the B super-locrian scale is B C D Eb F G A

Transposing this to C, you get C Db Eb Fb Gb Ab Bb.

Let me know if I'm making sense to you.

-Paul

I have seen and taken numerous classes with jimmy and his approach and view
is soo black and white and offensive to me. His views on pat metheny made me
want to scream! Jimmy Bruno feels threatened by the thought of music at a
new level. I used to love him..... then i just started to see a lot of
shallowness in his playing. Im sorry if im being to blunt here... but these
are my feelings. His technique has suffered greatly also... i asked what he
prctices to keep in shape... he replied " well, i dont feel the need to
practice anymore". It was really evident when he was showing us scales. He
would also play an exercise as fast as he could just to impress the class.
He kept messing up! Not everyone is perfect, but thats why theres practice!

anyone else agree??

hit me back!

-jack

In a message dated 8/14/01 12:22:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ceolan@... writes:

These are people I'd go to see to hear exciting jazz. No apologies for
omitting some that many regard as great, but I've seen and don't care to see
again.


Jimmy Bruno,
Ron Eschete - really inventive and swings
Russell Malone
Mimi Fox
Bill Frasell
John Stowell
Paul Bollenback
Dan Faehnle
Mundell Lowe
Peter Berstein
Peter Leitch
John Stowell
Joshua Breakstone
Larry Coryell
Gray Sergeant
Mark Elf
Howard Alden
Pat Martino
Tuck Andress
JOhn Pisano
Ron Affif

As I said, not in order. Great players who have passed on or retired are
omitted, but I still listen to them.

Let's hear from others. I was truly astonished that Jimmy wasn't on the
list. He does it all. Great fire and chops, and, fortunately, musical
sense to say something. I've heard others with great chops that bore you
after one set, but not Jimmy.

My 2 cents for tonight.

I would like to see:

Jim Hall (the guitar players' guitar player)
Kenny Burrell
Mick Goodrick
Alan Holdsworth


Andy

--- In jazz_guitar@y..., "David E. Lee" <dalee@c...> wrote:

At 06:56 PM 8/13/01 +0000, you wrote:

What is the system in "Mr. Goodchord's Almanac of Guitar Voice-
Leading"? Or are we talking about another variant of the Guitar
Grimoire?

Mick has worked out an exhaustive system of voice leading chords.
By exhaustive, I mean for 3, 4, quatral and 9th voicings of chords in
all possible possibilities without doubling voices. He has worked out
a huge listing of chords based on given formulae...

Okay, so it sounds like we're looking at a Guitar Grimoire kind of
approach: computer-generated voicings based on some chord formulas.
This reminds me of college buddy of mine who was appalled at the
number of formulae most of his colleagues were memorizing. "Dude,
just memorize the basic formulae and _generate_ the other formulae."

That's my personal approach. There's no way I'm going to be able to
memorize a phone directory's worth of chord voicings. MY BRAIN IS
TOO SMALL. *<:o) This is my biggest beef with Ted Greene's Chord
Chemistry and with the Guitar Grimoire series.

But I can memorize a set of formulae and run harmonized scales using
the chords of choice and I can move chord changes with voice-leading
in any direction I choose using chord formulae and knowing where
notes are on the strings. That's relatively easy. For example,
three inversions of a triad on strings 1-3 and three inversions of a
triad on strings 2-4, knowing the scale degrees of each triad and
then knowing the individual notes on strings 1-4 is much less stuff
to memorize than all the notes of all the triads on all four strings.

Both approaches contain the same info but I can fit all that formula
stuff info into my head. Not so with lists of chord-tones.

Lists aren't going to do it for me. Your mileage may vary of course.

This Goodchord book sounds like it wouldn't work for me.

On the other hand, Mick Goodrick's "Advancing Guitarist" is for me
one of the single-most inspiring and challenging guitar books I've
ever run across. Take any pair of pages from it and apply what is
written to your playing and you can have months of challenging work
ahead of you. Even disagreeing with what he writes in "AG" will
benefit your playing provided you can devise a coherent argument
against what he says and apply it to your playing.

Only my opinion of course, the usual disclaimers apply.

Cheers,
Kevin
www.TheNettles.com

With intros, you are trying to 1) establish the tempo, and 2)
establish the tonality.

There are several ways to do a "standard" sort of intro:

- Play the last four bars
- Vamp on the turnaround (works well on Bossa tunes)
- Vamp on Imaj-bVII9
- The basic I-VI-II-V:

So, for a tune in C, you might play Cmaj6 / A7 / D7 / G7. Of course,
this is only a skeleton, so you would try to make a melodic passage
and alter the chords. If the tune is starting out on a minor, I
basically do the above with the relative major, and then play the
minor II-V to the starting chord.

This is all very simple, and I have a lot more to learn, but it
really makes things sound much more professional if you're in a duo
or trio situation. Don't forget to work on endings, too!

Mick Goodrick plays standards with Joe Diorio on a CD called "Rare
Birds" (on RAM, I believe). But be forewarned, it's an "ear
stretcher"!

-Jim

Hi guys!!
I'm starting playing in a duo and i have to do many solo guitar
intros.
My question is about what's usual to do in intros of jazz
standards. I would like information about a more classical
aproach like for eg.: How would Joe Pass make a intro? And
about a more modern aproach, eg.: How would Mick Goodrick
make an intro? (for standards). By the way, anyone knows any
record of Mick Goodrick playing standards?
So, if you can help, i appreciate.
Thank's.

Vitor.
Portugal.

My understanding of the 60s Miles is that they often (not always)
played freely without form. We are actually working on stuff like
this at the workshop I am attending (schoolforimprov.org)... i.e.,
learning to play with form, without form, going back and forth etc...

Although Miles trashed Ornette and the later Coltrane (after he lost
Elvin Jones/ McCoy Tyner cuz they couldn't keep up), he often played
very freely (more in the Ornette Coleman sense). Ron Carter has said
that it was tough (and fun) to play with Miles for this reason... You
really had to listen to him to see if he is wandering away from the
form and going totally free, or if he still has one foot in the form
etc... Even playing freely, if you hint at the melody or whatever,
the band can get right back into the form seamlessly and THAT was the
beauty of the Miles band in the mid-late 60s!

This can be done only because these guys really knew each other well,
so knew how to cope with any situation that arose! (i.e., if Tony
Williams stops playing, that didn't freak anybody out, if Miles hit
and sustained an 'out' note, they responded accordingly).

There is a lot of documentation on Coltrane's playing because he was
very mathematical/methodical and in a certain sense easy to explain
(although tough to play), but how many analysis have you seen picking
apart his later works (Interstellar Space, Ascension etc...)?

The Miles 60s quintet was the same thing. It can't really be copied
or systematically analyzed (except for conceptually) in the sense you
can analyze Coltrane's substitutions. It was a product of the
communication between these guys that can only be achieved by playing
together so often you know who will do what and when, like a game...

Miles LOVED this spontaneaity and pushing his band, that continued
throughout the 70s and 80s.

The kind of variety that can be heard on standards in Miles Plugged
Nickel stuff comes from playing with the same band and knowing each
other so well and pushing each other and challenging each other to
respond to new things when playing the 'same old tunes'.

Unfortunately in NYC, it is so hard to keep a steady band going, so a
lot of the gigs you see doesn't stray too far from the form because
the musicians don't know each other too well, so bias to the safe
side (not to mention the fear of sounding to 'out' and getting
fired..)

Anyway, that is my understanding.

Ken

--- In jazz_guitar@y..., "Alisdair MacRae Birch" <akmbirch@y...>
wrote:

Dan

There is no short answer to the question, as I'm sure you
know. I think the 1967 Miles was expanding the limits of his
earlier experimentations with modal, chromaticism, the use
of the pedals (since 1950's when he altered the harmonic
structure of "Conception" by George Shearing and bore Kind
of Blue) and the stripping away of harmonic structures.

At 06:56 PM 8/13/01 +0000, you wrote:

What is the system in "Mr. Goodchord's Almanac of Guitar Voice-
Leading"? Or are we talking about another variant of the Guitar
Grimoire?

Mick has worked out an exhaustive system of voice leading chords. By exhaustive, I mean for 3, 4, quatral and 9th voicings of chords in all possible possibilities without doubling voices. He has worked out a huge listing of chords based on given formulae and presented the chords written only in note names (no tab, no notation, no particular key). Each chord group progresses in 2nds, or 3rds, or 4ths, etc with a minimum of movement in the voices. Sometimes only one note will change in the progression but the effect of the sound is profound.
The bottom line is you get to think of the movements of chords in terms of families and familiarity with this system allows you to seamlessly move any harmonic interval with full awareness of all four voices. The sounds are unreal. He plays things that I've NEVER heard come out of a guitar. And they're beautiful and he plays entire choruses this way. First it's diatonic, then he runs through the whole thing again with harmonic minor, then again with melodic minor . In the end, you'll never think of harmony the same way (root position, drop 2 or anyway like that) but with a comfortable working awareness of the movements of individual voices and their sounds.
A word of warning. He writes a brief explanation and a warning within the first half dozen pages and the entire rest of the book, which is heavier than a manhattan phone book, is chord voicings methodically presented and each page is a project of study in itself to get to know intimately. After the first 10 pages, you start to see the patterns, after the first 20 or so I started to see patterns in everything I played and the harmonies in my playing got more coherant. After the first chapter I looked back on the way I had seen chord choices and they seemed totally random and undiciplined.
I still play the way I did when that's the sound I want but the book has opened up a hundred ways out of the rut I would too often find myself in.
Did you check out the website?
Do ask more questions, it's hard for me to explain this in a few words.
David

People who are interested in using Pentatonics in Jazz should buy
Bergonzi's volume 2.



Pentatonics is one of those areas where the distance between
understanding the theory and being able to apply it in playing
situations is measured in light years. Hal Galper in the article
below says it took him 10-15 years to learn how to apply pentatonics:



The Bergonzi book is very pratical and gives you very specific things
to practice.

-Dan


--- In jazz_guitar@y..., "Jim" <kangas@t...> wrote:

I think Mark has a good question here. After having been exposed to

a

few different "systems" for using pentatonics (all of which are
useful), I've also found that there are plenty of differences of
*which* five notes people are referring to. Many of these systems
that I've been exposed to seem to target 'short cuts' (I'm not

using

that in a perjorative sense) that can be used over II-V-I's in a
major or minor cadence. Others seem to use them as ways to

introduce

some interesting tensions and chromaticism.

-Jim

--- In jazz_guitar@y..., Mark Stanley <bucketfullopuke@y...> wrote:

Hey Alisdair,
Can you explain Pentatonic Modes to me. Is there a
set system, names, etc. for the modes of Pentatonic
scales? If so, what are they or where could I find
out.
Thanks,
Mark

Hi,

I checked out the book on www.mrgoodchord.com. Is it the book that costs
$50.00? I don't mind spending the $50 because from what you say it's
worthwhile. However, for that price I want to make sure I'm purchasing the
correct book.

Many thanks,

Jim

New member

Maybe this is impossible, but I will like to hear your suggestions:

I love the sound of a hollowbody (exactly a Gibson Johnny Smith ?60),
but can I get a sound a bit like that by putting any known pick-up on
my mahogany solid-body LesPaul-scale guitar?

I will then replace a Duncan "the Jazz" hb which sounds almost fair
at tone/vol 7/7. Do jazzplayers often drop down tone/vol to get the
soft tone?

Last question: I have just translated my site about band-troubles
into a "world-version" Do you have any ideas of which sites - for
musicians - who could be interested in linking to it?

Per LH Denmark

Anyway, ear training (not necessarily perfect pitch, but more
melody
retention/ability to repeat) is now a much higher priority than it
was a week ago...

I am happy to see such maturity and foresight from a 'beginner'.

Ken

Oh, I just realized this post was in response to my own...thanks
a lot for the encouragement. It means a lot.

Best,
Lynn