Concerning ii, V, i in minor

[bakkiemetkoekie]

It's actually got 2 fifths! Same as it has 2 ninths!
It's got c# (#4, or b5) and d# a raised fifth. Both function as strong pulls to the tonic (D) on a v-i resolution. Why I would think of this scale is because it contains every single altered tone possible on a dominant and therefore the strongest harmonic pull to I. And as you correctly said it's the seventh mode of a melodic minor because all these altered tones are derived from the melodic minor.
I know you're not trying to prove a point amigo, we're all just learning here.

Im lost completely. First i want to say that you are in major! and i get no respons. The first message you are talking about G# D#(raised 5?) in Cminor now you do it again.
Sorry this is not logic at all. G7 in Cminor we call D# a Eb as b13 (so no double 5) and G# is Ab the b9. I know it are the same buttons on the saxophone but.....
Its nice to notice someone is very happy with his theory but im lost.

[bakkiemetkoekie]

My point is that those chords don't need to have one scale from which it's created. Here is a nice article which sheds some light on how I tend to think about harmony. http://jazzadvice.com/understanding-chord-tones/
.

Zoals Johan Cruijff zegt: je gaat het pas zien als je het door hebt

As Johan Cruijff is saying: When you understand it you'll see it. In dutch is nicer

[piwikiwi]

Zoals Johan Cruijff zegt: je gaat het pas zien als je het door hebt

As Johan Cruijff is saying: When you understand it you'll see it. In dutch is nicer

Ik snap het wel, ik vind het alleen onhandig:')

[JL]

Yatag, just speaking for myself (but probably everyone else here I hope), I think this is an interesting discussion and I certainly appreciate your contribution to it. I think it's fine to analyze this progression in terms of melodic minor or any other number of ways, and some here will find that useful, others who fully understand it (I'm sure Pete has a better handle on it than I do!) still might decide it's a more complex approach that they don't like to use when improvising.

Anyway:

...the seventh mode of the melodic minor that is used as the dominant in this concept not the fifth mode. The seventh mode of melodic minor is not in fact a diminished structure but is in fact a functional dominant.
.

Yes, this is exactly how I understand it. And I think it's wise to know this relationship. I know Pete knows it well, because he's discussed it before on this forum. My approach to G7b9, if I'm going to think of a scale, would be what I'd call a G dim/whole tone scale, aka the 'altered scale'. I prefer dim/whole tone because it's more descriptive, even if it is a mouthful: G G# A# B (that's the dim part) C# D# F (the whole tone part).

And of course it's the same scale as the seventh mode of G# melodic minor (starting on G). And I'm glad I know that. Knowledge is power!

I just find it easier mentally to relate to the root of the chord and think of the tones in relation to that chord root, rather than do the mental gymnastic (slight as it may be) of thinking "G# melodic minor, starting on G". That's just me. So my thought process would be, starting on the chord root, with the main chord tones in bold:

1 b2 b3 3 #4 #5 b7 Of course the b2 is actually the b9 chord extension. And I guess you could call the b3 a #2, the #4 a b5 etc. But it's just a matter of how you like to put it together.

I should add that I wouldn't always think of it this way. Sometimes I just think G B D F Ab and fill in what seems to work with the tune. I don't think you have to alter the '5' chord tone, do you?

[Jazzaferri]

For me, if I know that a group of chords that follow melodic minor harmony I know that I can pick any note from the tonic Melmin scale to stay somewhat in the box. Not too difficult when I know the song.

I find that sight reading I am not always far enough ahead of the game that I readily identify Mm harmony sections.

[Pete Thomas]

Sorry Pete,

I've obviously caused offence to you with my earlier post. I genuinely took your comment about it being complex, as you didn't understand it, as you being humorous. I wasn't being facetious about not understanding it, surely you can see the humour as it is a very aposite alternative definition of the word complex?
However you obviously didn't intend humour, so I sincerely apologize if I caused offence. I don't use smileys and such so I think perhaps it came over wrong.

No offence, it was just the quoting out of context i minded.

As you correctly say, the fifth mode of melodic minor yields a dominant with a natural ninth -diatonically. As I mentioned earlier, that is why it is the seventh mode of the melodic minor that is used as the dominant in this concept not the fifth mode.

Well, actually I didn't say "the fifth mode of the melodic minor", I don't run with the concept of modes of a melodic minor. To me that is an unnecessarily contrived concept.

And so I don't understand what you mean by "the seventh mode of a melodic minor being used as the dominant in this concept." That is goobbledygook to me.

I have to say that I am though a little concerned at some of the things you have said in this post.
You use the words "instead of having a nice healthy respectful debate about it". Well I wasn't aware that I had moved outside of that situation.

No, nobody has moved outside of that definition, I was merely attempting to head that off at the pass, so to speak. I apologise that it came out as accusatory. I was not happy about being quoted out of context that's all. It just happens to be something I dislike, I'm usually happy to be the object of humour, I certainly don't mind people having opposing opinions, just don't misquote me or falsely represent anything I say, that's (nearly) all I ask.

[Pete Thomas]

Pete,

Let me assure you, you were in no way the object of humor,

As I said, i wouldn't mind if I was

I genuinely thought that you made a really funny aside as to the the meaning of the word complex. That is not misquoting, that's a misunderstanding.

You are not following me, You quoted me without giving the context, it was not a misquote but an out of context quote, which implied I didn't know what a diminished scale is. that's all.

In as far as your accusation that I have misquoted and misrepresented you, I assume you are referring to the fact that I said you had referred to the fifth "mode" of melodic minor, when in fact you had said that in melodic minor harmony the V7th chord is a ninth. I apologize again, if you look at that as a mis-quote.

Yes, that was a misquote, as I didn't say anything about modes of a melodic minor. I have no problem with being quoted, the problem I have is with being paraphrased incorrectly, misleadingly or out of context.

I appreciate you don't accept the concept of modes of the melodic minor. I'm afraid I find this extraordinary. Surely ANY scale structure can yield modes, scale chords etc. What makes the melodic minor so contrived? And where exactly is the boundary line where one concept is a contrivance, and to whom?

When it interferes with the creative process of improvising. To me.

To me modes are for modal music (not for finding scales to "fit" chords). In that respect I have yet to hear a modal melody that is in a "mode" of a melodic minor.

In regard to your term "gobbledegook", which you used to label my description of the concept of using the scale /chord and mode derived from melodic minor as a resource for a V7alt moving to one minor, well, you just moved outside of your own terms of a nice respectful debate right there friend.

Again, you are misunderstanding. I said "that is gobbledygook to me", note the "to me". I didn't say you were speaking gobbledygook, just saying it was in language I did not understand. What Einstein said was gobblydook to me, but he was a genius. So it's not an insult in any way, more an expression of my lack of understanding what is being said.

If my posts are an irritation to you I suggest you show no further interest in them. I certainly won't have any further interest in yours.

with respect.

I don't quite see how that is with respect. It doesn't sound like there's much respect at all !

[Pete Thomas]

, I just find it bizarre that people are so resistant to looking at this concept.

I don't think think people are at all resistant to looking at that concept. I think any resistance is possibly just the resistance to using it, after looking at it thoroughly and rejecting it in favour of something they find more useful.

[bakkiemetkoekie]

Sorry but i cant take this serious anymore.
For me mr Luteman you gave the right answer yourself: Cminor natural! and try to hear the difference between Cminor7 and Cmin/major7 so when the accompinist behind you play whatever you can properly react.
Good Luck

[JL]

I have to say that I didn't think that it was a particularly esoteric thing until I saw some of the reactions here..

I don't think this is being looked at in such an esoteric way, and this discussion is probably not as emotionally charged as it might seem. Although if you read through some of the threads on music theory here, you'll see some fairly passionate opinions. It's just that there is more than one approach, as you have also pointed out.

I learned all these scales, exotic and otherwise. Melodic minor, harmonic minor, altered, diminished, the various modes of the major scale, etc, etc. And I think it was very important to learn them, understand them, and get them under my fingers in all 12 keys (still working at it, of course). But what I have found, for me, is the 'chord scale' approach doesn't really work that well. If done right, it results in all the 'right' notes, but isn't too helpful in playing a good melody or solo. For a basic example, try playing a blues using the three mixolydian scales that correspond with I-IV-V. It'll sound bloody awful. But if instead you play off the important chord tones, with voice-leading, leading tones, enclosures, chromatic lines, toss in some minor & major blues scale/ pentatonics for spice, and pay attention to the phrasing and vocabulary, it will sound pretty good.

Just to be clear, that's what I've found to work for me, so when someone asks for advice, all I can do is tell 'em what I've discovered. The chord scale approach is pretty well entrenched in the educational system for jazz (at least I see if referred to all the time) and so I think it's not a bad idea to offer some other (better?) alternatives.

Just an aside, but I don't think the guitarist approach will always work the same on the sax.

[Jazzaferri]

As a guitar player for many years, I find that the two complement each other quite well. OTOH I am not sure what you mean with a guitarist approach JL. I would like to know that that means to you as I find also that the chord scale approach doesn't work well for me either. I have melodic ideas that I use and the chord tones give me some idea of in the box landing spots for new songs. For tunes I know, I dont think about chords scales at all while I am playing.

[JL]

As a guitar player for many years, I find that the two complement each other quite well. OTOH I am not sure what you mean with a guitarist approach JL..

Don't put me on the spot here. I'll admit I know very little about guitar playing, but i play with guitarists all the time. I remember some years ago being very surprised to find out that a guitarist can change keys and play all the same 'shapes' and patterns in the new key, so they can pretty much play the same in most keys, just in a different postition (correct me if I have that wrong). I realize the open string keys like E have some advantages, but am not sure what they are. Anyway, on the sax every key feels very different and you have to get a whole new fingering pattern under your fingers. I actually think that's an advantage in some ways because it helps form some different ideas in different keys (at least for me it does).

So in terms of those finger patterns or shapes, I think there are some real differences that might not translate for one instrument to the other. Not to mention the fact you can play actual chords on the guitar.

I do agree that there may be some advantages in knowing how to play both instruments well.

I could have this all wrong, though. I'm way out of my league talking about playing the guitar.

[Jazzaferri]

JL while you my not be. Guitar player you have one of the concepts down. It is easy to shift position to shift a key although going beyond a few semitones can dictate changing position. Patterns are a blessing in one way and a trap in another. Thankfully there are only limited different fingerings for each scale depending on the scale and whether open strings can be used.

The complexity for guitar is having different fingerings on many of the notes. Think of Bb on steroids. Which one do I go to.

Ever since being able to play sax again a few years ago, I have been finding that my guitar lines are fresher and my sax lines are more related to the underlying harmony. Even though I try hard to not play any patterns the fact is some moves are easier or more natural than others so they tend to creep in a bit subconsciously. My sax playing I think is a bit more arpegiated than when I was young but that could also be faulty memory lol.

[piwikiwi]

I just noticed this post had gone unanswered re help with regards to how you have a natural ninth on a -7b5 chord.
In a voicing of a -7b5 chord put the expected modal derived (locrian whatever b9) as an extension, And hold it there. ...uh huh.
Then try a -7b5 and play a natural 9th, and hold it there. (enter own impression here!)

I think you will get the same feeling I do on that!
The next problem is, once you get that sound, you're never going to stop using it. So you will want to know where you get it and as you say the only chord scale relationship that can derive it is the 6th mode of melodic minor. Functionally it's the ii chord in a tonic minor key so the logic that allows you to use it as a ii is functional harmony, (not diatonic) which says that you can you can substitute a like functioning chord anywhere.

I'm not a guitarist, but learned this very thing from one, and I think he said that it was awkward to voice a -7b5 with a ninth on the guitar without getting into clusters-I don't know what that means btw! If you have a piano, it might be clearer.

Interesting you mention Levine. So did Piwikiwi, is that Mark Levine as "the jazz piano workbook?"
I got into the way of calling this locrian 9 - there is no set symbolism-nomenclature for these structures as yet.
I don't think they have fully percolated through the JazzEd intestine!

I avoid the problem of the 9 the easy way when I'm playing piano. Normally I would voice a II chord like this 3-5-7-9. But with a II in minor I voice it like this. 3-5-7-1 ^^.

I have the Jazz piano book and the jazz theory book by mark levine.

[Jazzaferri]

Fwiw on guitar it is easy to do a half dim adding a flat9 so long as one is prepared to do either a rootless or third less version.

In Cm7b5. Notes are C Eb. Gb. Bb. +b9 Db. Take off the root and one is left with Ebm7.

[lutemann]

Some things are very easy on the guitar but some things aren't. There are very few good readers on the guitar for example. Also, it takes a lot longer to be able to play what you hear on the guitar.

[Pete Thomas]

It was just to help explain where the natural ninth is coming from on the -7b5 chord instead of the expected b9. Though both have their use, the natural ninth is so much more consonant and interesting. And without mentioning it, it's got a solid justification in theory if you understand the structures derived from the scale that I'm not going to mention!

Yes, it's commonly taught that a b9 on a half diminished is to be avoided unless you are very very careful. Well that's what I was taught anyway. To my ears also the (natural) 9th sounds much better, though the b9 does have it's place and a lot has to do with voicing and subjectivity.

However, once in the context of a chord sequence, a natural 9 on a IIØ7 could be accused of causing some disturbance as it adds a major 3rd in a minor key. In general (in traditional tonal harmony) a natural 9 on a half diminished is possibly more likely to be an extension to chord VIØ7 - derived from a melodic minor, yes, a solid justification in theory

[Matt Otto]

Sometimes working on a "melody" or "line" (which may or may not imply a scale) that outlines the harmony and embraces horizontal voice-leading principals, can be helpful when learning to hear and improvise over minor ii V7 i progressions.

FWIW, here's a few examples of minor ii V i melodies from my blog:

http://mattotto.org/?cat=242

http://mattotto.org/?cat=206

http://mattotto.org/?cat=182

http://mattotto.org/?cat=219

http://mattotto.org/?cat=221

[Jazzaferri]

I could understand entirely how much more difficult it is to play what you hear on guitar. Given the choice of alternative fingering and position for any idea, I think horn players have it kind of easy when we complain that the fingering is different in every key.
At least that is only a dozen permutations!

I am well over the 10,000 hour mark and have learned classic and Gypsy Jazz on guitar. I am fortunate enough to have had a number of positive comments over the years on having a lyrical style.

I attribute that in part to playing sax for a number of years at an early age. While I feel fortunate that I can usually play what I hear on guitar I find it much easier on sax. In truth I really don't quite understand why.

Anyway, I too find this a very thought provoking thread. I am only now getting comfortable with playing MM harmony on guitar at speed. It took me a few hours over a few days to figure out a 6 note voicing I liked for 7Alt chords that didn't rely on open strings and I could play without becoming a contortionist. Never had that problem on the horn

[Jazzaferri]

Incidentally FWIW if one takes off the tonic root of a fifth string Cm7b5 on guitar and plays a natural 9 in the basement one ends up with the notes D F# (Gb)

A# (Bb) Eb which is a D aug triad with a b9. Cool sounding "ART" chord D+add b9 I put in the add rather than no as otherwise it would indicate a b7 in the mix and that changes the sound dramatically and I need a fifth very long finger to play it other than cheating with an open string.