In the Box - Some thoughts

BluesBop Harry

Lango-Django wrote:

Harry, I don't quite understand why it's necessary to name that arp a Gm9... to me it's just Gm7 resolving to a C13...

Yeah, you can think that way too. But a lot of improvisers think of the II-V as one entity so you just play over the V or the II. The advantage of thinking Gm9 over the whole II-V is that all the notes are there and fit both chords , if you wanted to justify that phrase over C7 you'd end up with C13sus4(no root) and that's much more complicated than a simple Gm9, isn't it?
So now you can work on this quasi-pentatonic arpeggio and play over both minor and dominant chords, plus that same Gm9 works beautifully over Bb Major (you get: Root, 3, 5, maj7 and 6) or over Ebmaj7#11.
That's why I love those 4-5 notes arpeggios, practice one and you have a whole bunch of different chords to play it against.

I ask because my Stephane Wrembel "Getting Into Gypsy Jazz" specifically states that gypsies deliberately avoid m7 chords, usually preferring either m6 or straight minor chords.

Stephane is right in that m7 and Maj7 chords aren't used traditionally much in this style, but that is as chords... as in rhythm... While playing melodies Django loved Maj7 and m7 arpeggios, he plays them all over the place!

Adrian Holovoty said once that when he plays, the right notes just light up on the fretboard, and the lights move around as the chords change.

Louis Armstrong said that when he played he saw a tree in his mind with all the notes hanging from it's branches " I just pick the ones that are ripest!"

Lango-Django

Interesting way of thinking about chords, Harry, thanks for bringing to my attention... I have to admit that as a former folk/bluegrass player, I still tend to think of that ii7 chord as sort of a subdom chord.

Which reminds me--- stop me if you've heard this one--- the bluegrass guitarist decides to take a few lessons from the local jazz guitarist, and so the first thing that happens is that the jazz guitarist says, "OK, I'll back you up; why don't you just play a little bit in C for me so I can hear what you're doing?"

So the bluegrass guitarist plays a few bars, and the jazz guitarist says, "Okay, now switch to the subdominant."

To which the bluegrass player says, "This IS the subdominant!"



Will

PS You know, we could use a real smart guy like you in our group, Harry, why don't you buy the Givone book and join us?

Passacaglia

I know this is likely almost frivolous, given my current abilities and experience, but as I'm pretty seriously keyed, and playing hard (as my bones will allow)...I've mentioned I play almost exclusively rhythm, and doing everything I can to exhaust its potential....but moving into some lead playing, working through Michael's book, and Stephan's book after. Heading to DIJ, and working on melodies for the standards.

'kay, I'll get to the point. I was impressed, but lost, with Romane's Manouche book, years ago. For someone with the intention of moving on, at some point, from introductory lead material, would you folks recommend Romane's text, or Givone's text (or neither, given my experience; or both....and if so, would you recommend an order)?

Craig Bumgarner

Regards Romane's book, I think lots of people have had difficulty with it. To me, it starts in the middle of things and jumps around from there. Romane obviously knows what he is talking about so maybe it is the translation or the cultural differences in the way music is described, but I couldn't make heads or tails out of much of it.

Jim Kaznosky

Romane's book contains a lot of good information, but it is not a beginner's book. I would start with Givone.

Passacaglia

Thank you both. I love Romane's playing, just wasn't sure if it was due to my inexperience, or something else with the book. This was many years ago, and I've got a much better handle generally on things (not that my fingers are up to it, that's coming, but in general, I "get it" in terms of harmony-sense, etc.). Thanks, helps clear it up.

That said, I sense the Givone text is itself pretty challenging - would there be any utility for someone like me, who is able to transcribe melodies some, now, and just starting to think of solo/improv stuff (want to stress, just starting - not even up to it, technically).

Thanks, apologies for hijacking the thread somewhat.

Lango-Django

[quote]but moving into some lead playing, working through Michael's book, and Stephan's book after.[/quote]

1---- DEFINITELY stay with Michael's book!!!! It's the gold standard!

Don't even think of beginning your education with any other book. And don't start working out of any other method until after you've mastered it.

2----- Stephane's book is good, and similar to Givone's in some ways. It includes a virtual encyclopedia of GJ arpeggios, and includes many short examples of the style. IMHO, you could use it at the same time you're using other methods. The price is sure reasonable!

3----- I haven't seen Romane's book, though I love his playing. Now, Givone's book admittedly has its shortcomings (I've posted my own review elsewhere on this site) but what I like about it is that you feel like you are getting a systematic, organized education in the GJ style and not just a sort of random bag of tricks.

When you are ready, we'd love to have you join our Givone group, but first, get to work on mastering "Gypsy Picking", you'll be glad you did!

Regards,

Will

Passacaglia

Thank you Will, great advice. I know my flaw is to want to get on this quickly...especially as I'm hungry, I'm 50, and I've got a bod that tends to go south on me...

At any rate, I hear you, and really appreciate your thoughts. I do about 3 hours a day, about as much as I can do at this point, and Michael's book figures heavily in that. (I just do the open string "warmup" exercises and "basic manouche licks" from Stephane's book, and the rest is all rhythm - playing with approaches, and otherwise just laying down some hours burning away, I hope, inconsistencies in tone, tempo, etc., in accompaniment).

Many thanks. Will keep looking to this thread, and hope to be a useful "Givone" member at some point.

Paul

Jazzaferri

I have learned over the decades of playing/practicing to find a balance between really focussed practice getting stuff down that I am not familiar with to the point where I can do it well with the same amount of attention as I use with say a fork while eating and some creative experimentation time to find one's own voice.

The amount will obviously vary between individuals based on inclination, goals and technique however if developing one's own voice is important then:

With a few noteworthy exceptions of solo's that one thinks are immaculate in their conception and execution, I think it much better to not learn whole solo's note for note. IMO find phrases that speak to you personally and passionately and learn them to the point of effortless mastery....like you use a fork.

A very wise and accomplished guitar player from my ancient past told me play it a 100 times you know it, a thousand times you own it.

Passacaglia

Wonderful post, Jazz. Gonzalo, in the DC School series, mentioned this as well, and it makes sense. I'm working on Adrian Holovaty's All of Me, the really sweet, melodic Clair de Lune played by Tim Robinson, and several others. But my bent was to try to get it note for note, through the solo. I'm reminded of something I heard about Bireli, how he just worked every one of Django's solos, till he had them.

I really hear what you're saying, the above notwithstanding. I remember once, when training as a Shakespearean actor, my voice teacher told me, "stop being such a good student." I know how what she means; I don't know if I'm conveying it at all well, but I hear echoes of what you're saying, in what she said at the time. Finding phrases that move, and getting them down, makes sense.

I really am sorry, if this is off-thread; but as a leaping off point, what do you think of taking phrases, and just transposing them into a bunch of keys?