yes, that will be called quartal.

You got it and you seem to have a great ear. But the penultimate one could work more like F#7b9b13, particularly if followed by some kind of B. But that is also a device, voicing tertial structures quartally. Toto was influenced by jazz; David Paich's father was Marty Paich, a big jazz arranger.

When I first got what that was I went to reliable music and tuned an Oberheim. oscillators to these kinds of stacks and played a lot of artificial scales I was screwing around with. It was 'of moment' to me.

Your straw man must be feeling so pwned by this prattle. I don't rely on any 'perceptions', I look at musical objects as objects and do it with a clear eye and ear.

What is staring me in the face, sir, are your opinions. I reject your opinions as if Truth. I do not reject the mastery of masters. Your arguments are the opposite of masterful.

I dropped out of school after the ninth grade. This did not affect my ability to learn to write coherently nor to debate cogently. I was never captivated by the concept of the internal combustion engine automobile but I managed to learn to drive ok. I even had a job driving.

Surely you do not have the meaning of 'cognitive dissonance'. <discomfort caused by holding conflicting cognitions (e.g., ideas, beliefs, values, emotional reactions) simultaneously>

There isn't any sign of that from me, nor any psychological manifestation, following me merely not buying your argument. Which is in this thread little more than an appeal to authority. And you're bashing people for not accepting your take on what is INCREDIBLY BASIC: people need to know what in a line fits with chords in that kind of practice. THIS IS NOT NEWS, MAN!!! If it is the sum of your knowledge that's one thing. But there is nothing to fail to get, except your overarching opinion which seems to follow a premise, 'chords are the most important thing in music'.

Apparently you, using Band in a Box, rely on a set of chord changes before you will try and come up with a line. Fortunately I don't.

It's fine with me if you like that box. But you're actually trying to convince the world is it The Way. You wind up here, not for the first time, with a thrust of inflicting your pedestrian taste on others as the One True Path. Kind of bizarre to me. You're not going to find this a happy route I guess.

what about that shows disdain for anything? I didn't grow up with anything but jazz and pop records. The more outside things I was exposed to were Stan Kenton's 'Experiments in...' series and 'Inside Sauter/Finegan', two arrangers that formed a band and managed some popular success, touring and selling albums, being weird on purpose with pop songs. I was not exposed to Schoenberg Second Viennese School, or the later on 'avant' composers before I was say 18, but I was exposed to it from Schoenberg students particularly, from TV scores. Or, Lalo Schifrin, you know. Avant garde composer, Mission Impossible theme. Pretty hip I thought. Memorable melody! Too bad if this offends you, people more curious than yourself.

You can try to convince yourself I don't know something instead of addressing any point but it's not intelligent discourse. Frankly the things you know I had sussed quite young.

You have a completely unnecessary dichotomy, yet again. In service of bashing people into your kind of religious belief about chords and that false dichotomy. You absolutely will not consider other people's contributions to threads. It's terrible and I assure you I'm not the only person noticing this.
That may be the most absurd non sequitur I've seen in a while. BTW that means 'it does not follow' [what happened in the thread].
Last edited by jancivil on Tue May 29, 2012 11:31 am; edited 1 time in total

as far as a video of a guy doing a walking bass as evidence of 'melody supports the chord', it's off the mark for a couple reasons.

1) the bass tends to begin from the perspective of the fundament OF the harmony.
2) a walking bass is not usually itself the tune it supports. The bass can reasonably be said to support the harmony.

BUT the role of walking is not significantly different than a baroque bass line, which is to say it can't be reasonably said to be in substance other than a contrapuntal approach. You seem to want every choice in a line to be *determined* by a chord chart as if Band in a Box is the level of thought one ought to be after.

when a bass player listens and crafts the line to the lead player, let's say a singer singing the melody, is the bassist restricted to the thought of 'chord' or is there really melody to content with? In two parts. People listening for when to enter for their solo, making a compelling transition, they are listening to lines. Interacting with the rest of the ensemble, let's get down to basics in jazz, Dixieland? This_is_counterpoint.

I could say this is right before you and you don't get it. You like that box, you got your mind closed up in it.
The way you come off here is as someone that NEVER LISTENS to the rest of the group.

Finally, you present us with a deterministic axiomatic truth ['it ought to be self-evident that everyone makes decisions *determined by* the chord name'], which seems anthetical to the spirit of jazz improvisation.

To sum, the OP in the thread was to discuss people with a mistaking the trees for the forest POV and an unnecessary dichotomy of chords/scales up in theory class. With you that's a good thing?

to be precise, these two could reasonably be said to be tertial structures voiced quartally.

C#7#9b13
F#+5 (or b13) b9


but from 1:30 in the toto record it doesn't go anywhere and I get the open, suspended kind of feel so certainly that's a quartal approach.

as though the cart is what the horse needs in order to move forward.

there are things a more studied approach will bring to light following jazz practice, George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept, not a lite read... like that. But I find it strange a person needing to go to college to get jazz harmony concepts as basic as what's shown by tappermike.

As far as I can tell the creators in front of jazz - and for Louis Armstrong, Bird was avant-garde, or something, 'Chinese music' - got their education largely off the street.

But when you get into more advanced concepts, ask yourself what Chick Corea, Herbie Hancock, McCoy Tyner looked at and formulated principles from. Interesting that a guy with such an anal-retentive approach as tappermike is so allergic to concepts out of 'classical'.

I vascillated a bit before I went off to seek some higher educating, between the jazz schools and conservatory. I find that Berklee focuses on things more like a trade school than a conservatory approach - and for a time I tended to somewhat regret I didn't go there - but out of this kind of discussion, 'jazz theory course' seems like it could be some bullshit. The one at CPCC seemed hip, Grover got them TV chords and we had a good time looking at new information.

as far as what to do in music that likes to take ii-V to some kind of I, and i as the new ii to obtain more movement; modulation constantly by b5 subsitute to find the full chromatic and all this, there are principles. the seventh of the ii to the third of the V, which is good for flat five of V equally, these are target tones and a kind of roadmap. If you're sequencing down by tones, a straight chromatic in descension is your safe tones. etc.

this is not news to me Mike. It was when I was 19 and picked up a Mickey Baker book but it's just not real challenging theory to an educated musician. 11 of the ii7 is #11 of bV/V7 (bII7) was of moment to me once upon a time.

As far as it being deterministic axiomatics, that's some boring shit, Jim. AFAICT that is a sure path to tedium from a soloist. You have twelve tones and the matter of one of them being wrong at some point is GWYNE HAPPING.
So in real time you have to be flexible. You have twelve motherfucking tones, you're in a music that once erpon a time decided to exploit the full chromatic, so you explore some options following that idea. There is inside playing and outside playing. One provides a contrast, maybe you feel you're too out for too long and you go for blues feel and limit the numbers.

OTOH you can be safe as milk with this puritan determinism.

Trolling split.

I don't know if the horse is dead or not, but if there's still on topic arguing (or even discussing) to be done, have at it.

Nope, this thread has gone elsewhere. When 10 replies in a row are from one person, the thread is best put on quarantine status.

Thread retired at OP's (sensible) request.